ML20365A052

NRC-2018-000831 - Resp 9 - Interim, Agency Records Subject to the Request Are Enclosed, Part 4 of 5

ML20365A052
Person / Time
Issue date:	12/22/2020
From:	NRC/OCIO
To:
Shared Package
ML20365A047	List: ML20365A048 ML20365A049 ML20365A050 ML20365A051 ML20365A052 ML20365A053
References
FOIA, NRC-2018-000831
Download: ML20365A052 (190)

Text

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

All:

Tregoning, Robert Thu, 28 May 2015 10:20:51 -0400 Hull, Amy;Frankl, Istvan Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Efforts June NRC-lndustry materia ls mtg 5-28-15 mah.abh.pptx Please just let me know when this is final so that I can send it to NRR for placing in ADAMS.

Thanks, Rob Robert Tregoning Technical Advisor for Materials US Nuclear Regulatory Comm ission 21 Church Street, M/S CS-5A24 Rockville, MD 20850 ph: 301-251-7662 Blackberry:.... ! --___

_______...... _J{p)(6) fax: 301-251-7425 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:

Frankl, Istvan Sent:

Fri, 29 May 2015 10:03:42 -0400 To:

Tregoning, Robert;Hiser, Matthew;Hull, Amy

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Efforts June NRC-lndustry materials mtg 5-28-15 mah.abh.pptx

Rob, This presentation can be put in the public ADAMS as is. The document in ADAMS can be replaced if we can fix slide 15 on Monday.

Thanks, Steve From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 10:03 AM To: Hiser, Matthew; Hull, Amy; Frankl, Istvan

Subject:

Re: Harvesting Efforts June NRC-I ndustry materials mtg 5-28-15 mah.abh.pptx Matt:

Can I go ahead and put this version in ADAMS? We can still use the clean version for the presentation on Wednesday.

Rob Sent from an NRC Blackberry Robert Tregoning I

.... J(b}(fl} _..

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, May 29, 2015 09:39 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, Amy, I have made the changes in accordance with Kathy's comments as relayed by Steve in the attached PP. One final tweak Amy 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!

Matt From: Hull, Amy Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 10:03 AM

To: Frankl, Istvan Cc: Tregoning, Robert; Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

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

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hiser, Matthew Mon, 3 Oct 2016 12:58:23 +0000 Lyon, Fred RE: Harvesting Materials from Fort Calhoun Great, thanks Fred! My contact has been with Kristen Jacobsen at OPPD.

I will let you know if I need anything - just wanted to make sure there weren't any surprises if something got mentioned to you or the residents/region.

Thanks!

Matt From: Lyon, Fred Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2016 7:36 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Materials from Fort Calhoun Thanks for the info, Matt. Please let me know who your engineering contact is at FCS, so that if his name comes up with my licensing contact, I'll know who it is. Otherwise, just let me know if you need anything. Fred From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, September 30, 2016 12:39 PM To: Lyon, Fred <Fred.Lyon@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Materials from Fort Calhoun Hi Fred, I am a materials engineer in the Office of Research and am involved in a project to look into opportunities to harvest materials from decommissioning plants. I have been working with Bob Hardies (an SL in NRR/DE), who is retiring today.

Through Bob's contacts at Exelon, we reached out to an engineer at Fort Calhoun to inquire about what components they may have available for harvesting from Fort Calhoun, particularly from the vessel and internals. We have had one phone call with their vessel and internals engineer to discuss what materials they have in their vessel and internals. On this call, Bob and I made it very clear that this was purely an information-gathering exercise for research purposes and they were under no obligation to provide any information.

As the NRC PM for Fort Callhoun, I wanted to make you aware of this contact with Fort Calhoun and the potential for some further interaction to discuss harvesting possibilities at Fort Calhoun.

Please advise if there is anything I should be aware of with reaching out to my contact at Fort Calhoun.

Thanks!

Matt

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 1 Office: TWFN 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hi Matt, Thanks - - will do.

Cliff From: Hiser, Matthew Doutt, Clifford Wed, 3 Feb 2016 17:55:08 -0500 Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting meeting placeholder Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 4:08 PM To: Doutt, Clifford <Clifford.Doutt@nrc.gov>; Abogunde, Maryann <Maryann.Abogunde@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting meeting placeholder Hi Cliff, For this working group, we were piloting focusing on metallic components. I think our goal will be to expand to electrical and structural components over time.

So it probably won't make as much sense to attend at this point, but it would be good to talk to Roger and stay in the loop. He can share with you where we are heading and hopefully we can really expand as time goes on.

Thanks!

Matt 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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Doutt, Clifford Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 3:53 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Abogunde, Maryann <Maryann.Abogunde@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting meeting placeholder Hi Matthew, Roger forwarded the meeting place holder to me. I t hought I would check and see whether you wanted DLR electrical at the meeting or is this for none components?

Thanks,

Cliff

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hiser, Matthew Tue, 15 May 2018 18:36:13 +0000 Purtscher, Patri ck RE: Harvesting Meeting Prep/ Alignment Hi Pat, will you be attending or should we call you?

Thanks!

Matt

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, May 07, 2018 4:09 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Purtscher, Patrick; Tregoning, Robert; Audrain, Margaret

Subject:

Harvesting Meeting Prep/ Alignment When: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 3:30 PM-4:30 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: T10D40 Prep/ Alignment for meeting with electrical/ concrete folks the following day.

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Power Plants Attachments:

Hi Matt, Note to requester: Attachment is immediately following. The box with the red X in the first email is the PDF attachment (PDF Adobe icon and the file name) imbedded into the body of the email.

Moyer, Carol Thu, 19 Oct 2017 07:56:02 -0400 Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear PLiM 2017 guidelines.pdf Thank you for doing this. I will take a look at the content for possible suggested improvements. In the meantime, you should review the style guide sent from PLiM, and consider some formatting changes in your file (headers, e.g.).

-Carol From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 4:44 PM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Ramuhalli, Pradeep (Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov)

<Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov>

Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>;

Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants

<< File: IAEA PLiM Hiser 10-18-2017.docx >>

Hi Rob, Amy, Pat, Pradeep, I have adapted our previous poster/ presentation into a paper (attached) on very short notice. The deadline for PLiM papers is technically today, but given the extremely late notice, hopefully they can live with receiving it early next week following staff and management review here.

If you can possibly take a look at this by tomorrow (Thursday) or Friday and provide any feedback, that would be gireat.

I still need to clean up the references section, so don't mind the very casual state of it now. I'll clean that up tomorrow hopefully...

Thanks!

Matt

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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 4:41 PM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants

<< File: NRC PliM slides on Harvesting.pptx >>

Hi Rob, Amy, Pat, Here's is my adaptation of the poster info (along with some additional insights from the workshop) into slides for PLiM.

Please feel free to comment and edit freely. Ideally, we'd like to have these mostly agreed on at a technical level by COB tomorrow (Wednesday) to be able to discuss with NRR on Thursday and enter into management review and concurrence.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office ofNuclcar Regulatoiy Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-4 I 5-24541 Office: TWFN I 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 8:32 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol

<Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Iyengar, Raj

<Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov>

Cc: Thomas, Brian <Brian.Thomas@nrc.gov>; Wilson, George <George.Wilson@nrc.gov>;

Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants Allen:

Thanks for the head's up and for offering to make a presentation on this for RES. We're targeting to put together a 20 minute presentation on harvesting that we can discuss with you on Thursday morning. We'll also cover your points 2 and 3 at that time.

Cheers, Rob 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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 7:27 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Iyengar, Raj

<Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov>

Cc: Thomas, Brian <Brian.Thomas@nrc.gov>; Wilson, George <George.Wilson@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants Importance: High Another twist to the harvesting paper/presentation/poster for the PLiM conference.

I am willing to make a presentation at this "side event" if RES will put together slides - I would shoot for 20 minutes.

A couple of questions on this topic:

1.

Can RES pull together a presentation in the next day or two, that we can discuss Thursday AM?

2.

Has a paper been prepared (it appears from below that this is possible for inclusion in the conference proceedings)? If so, can I get a copy of it, or other background information.

3.

When will the poster be available to be mailed to Lyon? (Can I get a copy of what it will look like?)

I am sure that other questiions will arise.

Allen

---

Original Message-----

From: KANG, Ki-Sig [mailto:K.S.Kang@iaea.org1 Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 7:17 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Cc: KHAELSS, Martina <M.Khaelss@iaea.org>; KRIVANEK, Robert

<R.Krivanek@iaea.org>; 4th PLiM Conference - Contact Point <4th-PLiM-Conferen ce. Contact-Poi nt@iaea.org >

Subject:

[External_Sender] Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants

Dear Allen,

Regarding " Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants", now this paper will be presented on poster session in programme.

I think all of participants will be very interesting to this topic. But we have no time slot to present in oral session. Thus I recommend to arrange a side event to introduce this topic from 13:20 -14:00 on 24, Oct (Tuesday) if you want.

We can arrange the meeting room for presentation and discussion. Please think about and let me know.

Ki-Sig KANG Technical Head (PLiM/L TO)

Nuclear Power Engineering Section Division of Nuclear Power International Atomic Energy Agency Tel: +43 1 2600 22796 Fax: +43 1 2600 29598 E-mail: Ki-Sig.KANG@iaea.org

This email message is intended only for the use of the named recipient. Information contained in this email message and its attachments may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to others. Also please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system.

AUTHOR and OTHER-AUTHOR L t hand pt *1.. runnm h ts uth01 n 11 I

.I IH( IL.al.

PAPER TITLE IN TIMES NEW ROMAN 12 POINT BOLD CAPITALS, INDENTED BY 1 cm WITH NO MORE THAN 40 CHARACTERS PER LINE INCLUDING SPACES Subtitle if needed in Times New Roman 12 point bold italic, sentence case A.N. AUTHOR Organization Town/City, Country Email: address@correspondingauthor.com A.N. OTHER-AUTHOR Organization Town/City, Country Abstract c tr l r 11 n

o uthor._ "

1..:

This is an example of how to fom1at an abstract. The title is Times New Roman 10 point bold, indented by I cm. The text is Times New Roman 9 point, with a first line indent of I cm. The abstract is a single paragraph which may be up to 300 words long. It should not contain information not included in the paper. The abstract may not contain references, equations or the word 'we'. Write 'the paper', not 'this paper'.

I.

INTRODUCTION This is an example of how a paper for the Proceedings Series should be fonnatted. The text above shows how the running head, title, subtitle (if applicable), author names and affiliations, and abstracts should be fonnatted. The heading immediately above this paragraph is a first level paper heading; it is Times New Roman 10 point regular capitals. The body text of the paper is Times New Roman 10 point regular, with a first line indent of I cm.

Please use these examples to format your paper. Applying the styles saved in this document to your text should fonnat it correctly. Your word processing software may also contain a tool such as a 'format painter' that will enable you to copy the formatting from the example text to your own text. Alternatively, the information given in this template should enable to select the correct format for each section.

2.

ORIGINALITY, COPYRIGHT AND PUBLICATION The text of a paper submitted to this conference must be -original and must not have been published elsewhere previously. All papers will be scanned to ensure originality; if they are found to contain non-original text, only their abstract will be included in the proceedings.

If text or images included in the paper have been published elsewhere, the paper must be accompanied by evidence that permission has been given for the reuse. If no such evidence is supplied, only the abstract will be included in the proceedings. In addition, text must be properly cited and images properly acknowledged.

Papers will only be included in the proceedings if the IAEA Form B has been submitted prior to the conference. If the Form B is not received, only the abstract may be included in the proceedings, but this may also be omitted.

3.

HEADINGS AND SUBHEADINGS If you need to subdivide the sections of your paper, use the headings shown below. You can use second and third level paper headings. To subdivide further, please use lists numbered (a), (b ), and so on, but this is usually not necessary in a paper of normal length.

IAEA-C -123/45 1

t h d,a u 1 n' h 1' ts t c pJp 1 n I 1

~

\\\\

1 n

p I t oln l: tpit I. c tn: l 3.1.

Second level paper heading A second level paper heading is Times New Roman IO point bold, in sentence case.

3.1. I. Third level paper heading A third level paper heading is Times New Roman 10 point italic, in sentence case.

4. PAGE AND SECTION BREAKS If you need to move a heading to the following page, please use a page break (usually found in word processing software under the 'insert/page break' menu. Please do not press return several times to move text onto a new page.

5. TABLES Tables must be numbered consecutively and include a table heading. There is no full stop at the end of the heading. lAEA style is to use table borders and lines sparingly. Tables must be mentioned (called out) in the text and should be inserted foUowing the end of the paragraph in wlhich they are mentioned, or on the next page if there is not enough space. Tables are fonnatted in Times New Roman 9 point regular. For an example, see Table I.

TABLE l.

EXAMPLE TABLE

6. FIGURES Column I Align text left Align text left Column 2 Centre text Centre text Column 3 Centre text Centre text The figures you use in your publication must be original. Jfthey have been published elsewhere (even in other papers authored by you or one of your co-authors) they cannot be used unless a pem1ission is obtained and sent with the paper.

The figures must be numbered consecutively and mentioned in the text in the order in which they are numbered, using the abbreviation Fig. They should be inserted into the paper without a border and immediately below the paragraph in which they are mentioned, or on the next page if there is no space. They should have a caption, which is set in Times New Roman 9 point italic; the caption should be centred if it is a single line or aligned left if it is two lines or more long. An example of a caption can be seen below Fig. I. Note the capitalization of 'Fig.' in the figure caption.

7. REFERENCES In accordance with good academic practice, reference sources should be cited in the text to support the assertions it contains. IAEA style is to use numbered references in square brackets. There are different formats for sources such as books [I), internal reports [2), personal communication [3), unpublished data [4), single chapters from books [5], journal articles [6], websites and on-line databases [7], papers from a proceedings [8],

presentations including slides and handouts [9], and INFCIRCs [10]. Sources 'in preparation' or 'in press' use these terms in place of the year. Titles are given in their original languages if these use Latin alphabets, or translated into English for languages that do not use Latin alphabets. Please see the reference list below for examples of how to format the sources numbered [ 1-1 1). The text in the reference list is Times New Roman 9 poini regular.

AUTHOR and OTHER-AUTHOR L t hand pt *1.. runnm h ts uth01 n 11 I

c tr l r 11 n

o uthor._ "

1..:

.I IH( IL.al.

Section I Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 FIG. I. Chari showing the number of words in each section of this e,,;ample paper.

8. BIBLIOGRAPHY A bibliography is an optional section. If a source is not cited in the text but may nevertheless be of interest to the reader, it can be included in a bibliography, which follows the reference list. Sources that appear in the reference list should not be included in the bibliography. Please see the example bibliography at the end of this paper. The text in the bibliography is Times New Roman 9 point regular.

9. FURTHER INFORMATION 9.1.

Author affiliation Put the email address after the affiliation of the corresponding author, whether he or she is the first author or not. Please put the name of the authors' organization(s) in English. Do not give the organization's street address or postal code. For international organizations, no country is given. Please use the name of the country as it is given in the IAEA Member State list (for example, use ' Russian Federation', not ' Russia').

ff there is a long list of author names and some of them are from the same organizations or same States, please seek advice from the conference organizer on how to format such a list to save space.

9,2.

Bulleted lists If you use a bulleted list in your paper, please format it as below:

First bullet point; Section bullet point; Third bullet point.

If you need to use subpoints, please use this format:

First bullet point.

Section bullet point.

First subpoint; Second subpoint.

Third bullet point.

Please note the punctuation at the end of the points.

3

IAEA-C -123/45 1

t h d,a u 1 n' h 1' ts t c pJp 1 n I 1

~

\\\\

1 n

p I t oln l: tpit I. c tn: l 9.3.

Numbered lists If you use a numbered list in your paper, please format it as below, noting the punctuation at the end of the points:

(a) First bullet point.

(b) Section bullet point.

(i) First subpoint; (ii) Second subpoint.

( c) Third bullet point.

Please use (a), (b), etc., unless your text refers to the points elsewhere as 'the first point', 'the second point' and so on -

in this case, please use (I), (2), etc.

9.4.

General formatting Only the font Times New Roman should be used in the paper. The font Symbol should never be used in files intended for publication as it is not a Unicode font and letters n1ay change during production (for example,

µSv may print as mSv if the characterµ is inserted in Symbol font).

Underlining should not be used. Bold and italic may be used for emphasis, but should be used sparingly.

Paragraph line spacing is 12 point for 9 point text, 13 point for IO point text and 14 point for 12 point text, as used in this example paper. Only one space is used following a full stop.

Fooh10tes1 should be used only where necessary. They should be inserted at the end of each page, and not at the end of the paper as endnotes.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The heading of the acknowledgements section is Times New Roman 10 point bold capitals, centred. The acknowledgements section is an optional section and can be used to list funding bodies and other sponsors of the research, and to mention people who supported the research but whose contribution was not of a type to merit authorship of the paper.

REFERENCES

[I) AUTHOR, A., Book Title in Title Case, Series No. if applicable, Publisher, Place of Publication (Year).

(2) AUTHOR, A., Internal Report Title in Title Case, internal report, Organization, Location, Year.

(3) LETIER-WRlTER, A., Organization, personal communication, Year.

[4) RESEARCHER, A., Organization, unpublished data.

(5) CHAPTER-AUTHOR, A., "Title of chapter in sentence case", Book Title in Title Case, Publisher, Place of Publication (Year).

(6) AUTHOR, A., AUTHOR, B., AUTHOR, C., Journal article tille in sentence case, Abb. J. Title 1 2 (Year) 120---

123.

(7) AUTHOR, A., Title of Web Page or On-line Database in Title Case (Year),

www.webpage.com/exact -subpage-being-cited (8) AUTHOR, A., "Paper title in sentence case", Conference Title in Title Case (Proc. Int. Conf. Place of Conference, year), Publisher, Place of Publication (Year).

[9] PRESENTER, A., "Title of presentation in sentence case", Paper No., paper presented at Organization seminar on subject, Location, year.

[IO) Title of!NFCIRC in Tide Case, JNFCJRC No., IAEA, Vienna (Year).

1 Text in a footnote is Times New Roman 9 point regular.

AUTHOR and OTHER-AUTHOR L t hand pt *1.. runnm h ts uth01 n 11 I

c tr l r 11 n

o uthor._ "

1..:

.I IH( IL.al.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AUTHOR, A., Book Title in Title Case, Series No. if applicable, Puiblisher, Place of Publication (Year).

Title of Book by Same Author in Title Case, Series No. if applicable, Publisher, Place of Publication (Year).

AUTHOR, A., AUTHOR, 8., Book Title in Title Case, Series No. if applicable, Publisher, Place of Publication (Year).

ORGANIZATION A (Location)

Book Title in Title Case, Series No. if applicable (Year).

Book Title in Title Case, Series No. if applicable (Year).

Book Title in Title Case, Series No. if applicable (Year).

ORGANlZATlON B (Location)

Book Title in Title Case, Series No. if applicable (Year).

Book Title in Title Case, Series No. if applicable (Year).

Book Title in Title Case, Series No. if applicable (Year).

Book Title in Title Case, Series No. if applicable (Year).

Book Title in Title Case, Series No. if applicable (Year).

5

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Power Plants Thank you!

Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer Hiser, Matthew Thu, 12 Oct 201718:33:24 +0000 Hiser, Allen RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear 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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 12:22 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants Lyon Marriott Hotel Cite Internationale 70 Quai Charles de Gaulle Lyon 69463 France From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2017 9:46 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants For further background info, here is the workshop summary report and latest version of PNNL harvesting report.

Thanks!

Matt From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 7:57 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>

Cc: Frankl, Istvan <Istvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants Per IAEA:

All presentations will be uploaded in advance to the conference PC. Please email your presentation and the full paper to email address: PLIM2@iaea.org by Wednesday, 18 October.

See attached 2 of the NRR papers as examples.

Allen From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 4:52 PM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy

<Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>

Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants

<< File: Harvesting NRC Poster for PLiM_cem_ptp (IF).pptx >> << File: Harvesting IAEA Plim 2 page synopsis final draft.docx >>

I can address #2 and #3.

2. No paper has been prepared, perhaps we can ask IAEA about whether that is still possible. If so, we could pull something together.

For background info, we have the draft PNNL report and workshop summary report that I can share. I've also attached the two page extended abstract that was originally submitted.

3. I am picking up the poster today as I leave and will try to get it mailed as soon as possible.

(see attached PP) Do you have an address to where it should be sent?

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-24541 Office: TWFN 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 8:32 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol

<Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Iyengar, Raj

<Raj.Iyengar@nrc.gov>

Cc: Thomas, Brian <Brian.Thomas@nrc.gov>; Wilson, George <George.Wilson@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan

<lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gQY>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants

Allen:

Thanks for the head's up and for offering to make a presentation on this for RES. We're targeting to put together a 20 minute presentation on harvesting that we can discuss with you on Thursday morning. We'll also cover your points 2 and 3 at that time.

Cheers, Rob 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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 7:27 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol

<Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Iyengar, Raj

<Raj.Iyengar@nrc.gov>

Cc: Thomas, Brian <Brian.Thomas@nrc.gov>; Wilson, George <George.Wilson@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants Importance: High Another twist to the harvesting paper/presentation/poster for the PLiM conference.

I am willing to make a presentation at this "side event" if RES will put together slides - I would shoot for 20 minutes.

A couple of questions on this topic:

1. Can RES pull together a presentation in the next day or two, that we can discuss Thursday AM?

2. Has a paper been prepared (it appears from below that this is possible for inclusion in the conference proceedings)? If so, can I get a copy of it, or other background information.

3. When will the poster be available to be mailed to Lyon? (Can I get a copy of what it will look like?)

I am sure that other questions will arise.

Allen

---

Original Message-----

From: KANG, Ki-Sig [1]

Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 7:17 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Cc: KHAELSS, Martina <M.Khaelss@iaea.org>; KRIVANEK, Robert <R.Krivanek@iaea.org>; 4th PLiM Conference - Contact Point <4th-PLiM-Conference.Contact-Point@iaea.org>

Subject:

[External_Senderl Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants

Dear Allen,

Regarding " Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants", now this paper will be presented on poster session in programme.

I think all of participants will be very interesting to this topic. But we have no time slot to present in oral session. Thus I recommend to arrange a side event to introduce this topic from 13:20 -

14:00 on 24, Oct (Tuesday) 1if you want.

We can arrange the meeting room for presentation and discussion. Please think about and let me know.

Ki-Sig KANG Technical Head (PLiM/LTO)

Nuclear Power Engineering Section Division of Nuclear Power International Atomic Energy Agency Tel: +43 1 2600 22796 Fax: +43 1 2600 29598 E-mail: Ki-Sig.KANG@iaea.org This email message is intended only for the use of the named recipient. Information contained in this email message and its attachments may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to others. Also please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system.

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Hiser, Matthew Tue, 10 Oct 2017 20:52:15 +0000 Tregoning, Robert;Hiser, Allen;Hull, Amy;Moyer, Carol Frankl, Istvan Note to requester: Attachments are immediately following. The boxes with the red X in them in the first email are a Power Point and a Word attachment (Power Point icon with its file name, Word icon with its file name) that are both imbedded into the body of the email.

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants Attachments:

synopsis final draft.docx 0 0 Harvesting NRC Poster for PLiM_cem_ptp (IF).pptx, Harvesting IAEA Plim 2 page I can address #2 and #3.

2. No paper has been prepared, perhaps we can ask IAEA about whether that is still possible. If so, we could pull something together.

For background info, we have the draft PNNL report and workshop summary report that I can share. I've also attached the two page extended abstract that was originally submitted.

3. I am picking up the poster today as I leave and will try to get it mailed as soon as possible. (see attached PP) Do you have an address to where it should be sent?

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 30 l-415-24541 Office: TWFN l 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 8:32 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol

<Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Iyengar, Raj

<Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov>

Cc: Thomas, Brian <Brian.Thomas@nrc.gov>; Wilson, George <George.Wilson@nrc.gov>;

Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants

Allen:

Thanks for the head's up and for offering to make a presentation on this for RES. We're targeting to put together a 20 minute presentation on harvesting that we can discuss with you on Thursday morning. We'll also cover your points 2 and 3 at that time.

Cheers, Rob 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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 7:27 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Iyengar, Raj

<Raj.lyengar@nrc.gov>

Cc: Thomas, Brian <Brian.Thomas@nrc.gov>; Wilson, George <George.Wilson@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants Importance: High Another twist to the harvesting paper/presentation/poster for the PLiM conference.

I am willing to make a presentation at this "side event" if RES will put together slides - I would shoot for 20 minutes.

A couple of questions on this topic:

1.

Can RES pull together a presentation in the next day or two, that we can discuss Thursday AM?

2.

Has a paper been prepared (it appears from below that this is possible for inclusion in the conference proceedings)? If so, can I get a copy of it, or other background information.

3.

When will the poster be available to be mailed to Lyon? (Can I get a copy of what it will look like?)

I am sure that other questions will arise.

Allen

---

Original Message-----

From: KANG, Ki-Sig [mailto:K.S.Kang@iaea.org1 Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 7:17 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Cc: KHAELSS, Martina <M.Khaelss@iaea.org>; KRIVANEK, Robert

<R.Krivanek@iaea.org>; 4th PLiM Conference - Contact Point <4th-PLiM-Conference.Contact-Point@iaea.org>

Subject:

[External_Sender] Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants

Dear Allen,

Regarding " Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants", now this paper will be presented on poster session in programme.

I think all of participants will be very interesting to this topic. But we have no time slot to present in oral session. Thus I recommend to arrange a side event to introduce this topic from 13:20 -14:00 on 24, Oct (Tuesday) if you want.

We can arrange the meeting room for presentation and discussion. Please think about and let me know.

Ki-Sig KANG Technical Head (PLiM/L TO)

Nuclear Power Engineering Section Division of Nuclear Power International Atomic Energy Agency Tel: +43 1 2600 22796 Fax: +43 1 2600 29598 E-mail: Ki-Sig.KANG@iaea.org This email message is intended only for the use of the named recipient. Information contained in this email message and its attachments may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read,

copy, use or disclose this communication to others. Also please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system.

Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants M. Hiser", P. Purtscher", P. Ramuhallih, A. B. Hull*, and R. Tregoning*

• u.s. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Washington, D.C., USA hPacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA, USA 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 pllants (NPPs). In the U.S.,

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 t11at 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 (RPV) embrittlement, 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 U.S. and internat ionally, have stiut down or announced plans to stiut 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 (LWR) 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 NRC has recently undertaken an effort, with the assistance of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), to develop a strategic approach to harvesting aged materials from NPPs. Due to 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 harvest ing 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 partirnlar degradation scenario and should be defined with as much detail as appropriate in terms of the material (alloy, composit ion, etc.) and environment (temperature, fluence, chemistry, et c.).

Potentia I Criteria for Harvesting Prioritization A number of criteria may be considered when prioritizing the data needs for harvesting, including:

Applicability of harvested material for addressing critical gaps Harvesting for critical gaps prioritized over less essential technical gaps.

Ease of laboratory replicat ion 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 Plate c 17.8 11 For example, unusual operating experience or legacy materials (fabrication methods, etc.) no longer available.

Fleet-wide vs. plant-specific applicability of data Greater value in addressing an issue applicable to a larger number of plants.

Harvesting cost and complexity For example, harvest ing un-irradiated concrete or electrical cables less expensive and less complex tlnan harvesting from t he reactor internals or RPV.

Availability of reliable in-service inspection {ISi) techniques for the material/ component If mature inspection methods exist and are easy to apply, harvesting may be less va luable.

Availability of materials for harvesting Timeliness of the expected research results relat ive to the objectiive.

The above potent ial criteria provide a systematic approach to prioritiize data needs for harvesting. Different organizations may weigh and consider each of these criteria differently based on their interests and perspectives, but each criterion is I ikely relevant to some degree for any organization. NRC is interested in engaging with other organizations to prioritize data needs for harvesting and identify areas of common interest.

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 of high-priority data needs to the available sources of materials. The level of detail for the database should be appropriate for the factors influencing decision-making. NRC is interested in engaging with other organizations in developing the database.

Path Forwa rd NRC's experience is that harvesting can yield highly representative and valuable data on materials aging, but these efforts will be challenging. Hav*ing a clearly defined objective and early engagement with other stakeholders are keys to success. As specific harvesting opportunWes are identified through this strategic approach, t he NRC welcomes opportunities for cooperation and leveraging of resour,ces with other interested research organizations.

Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants M. Hisera, P. Purtschera, P. Ramuhallib, A. B. Hulla, R. Tregoninga, and C. E. Moyera au.s. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Washington, D.C., USA bPacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA, USA 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.

Extended plant operation and SLR raise a number of technical issues that may require further research to understand 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 (RPV) embrittlement, irradiation~assisted stress corrosion cracking ofreactor internals, concrete structures and containment degradation, and electrical cable qualification and condition assessment. Meanwhile, in recent years, a number of NPPs, both in the U.S. 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 (L WR) 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.

NRC has recently undertaken an effort, with the assistance of Pacific Northwest National Lab (PNNL), to develop a strategic approach for harvesting aged materials from NPPs. Due to 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 ( combination of material and environment) and should be defined with as much detail as appropriate in terms of the material (alloy, composition, etc.)

and environment (temperature, fluence, chemistry, etc.).

A number of criteria may be considered when prioritizing the data needs for harvesting, including:

Applicability of harvested material for addressing critical gaps o

Harvesting for critical gaps prioritized over less essential technical gaps.

Ease of laboratory replication of the degradation scenario o

For example, simultaneous the1mal and irradiation conditions are difficult to replicate or accelerated aging may not be feasible for a mechanism sensitive to dose rate.

Unique field aspects of degradation o

For example, unusual operating experience or legacy materials (fabrication methods, composition, etc.) no longer available.

Fleet-wide vs. plant-specific applicability of data o

Greater value in addressing an issue applicable to a larger number of plants.

Harvesting cost and complexity o

For example; harvesting unirradiated concrete or electrical cables less expensive and less complex than harvesting from the reactor internals or RPV.

Availability of reliable in-service inspection (ISi) techniques for the material / component o If mature inspection methods exist and are easy to apply to monitor degradation, harvesting may be less valuable.

Availability of materials for harvesting Timeliness of the expected research results relative to the objective.

The above potential criteria provide a systematic approach to prioritize data needs for harvesting.

Different organizations may weigh and consider each of these criteria differently based on their interests and perspectives, but each criteria is likely relevant to some degree for any organization.

NRC is interested in engaging with other organizations to prioritize data needs for harvesting and identify areas of common interest.

Another activity NRC is pursuing is the potential 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 of high-priority data needs to the available sources of materials. As with the data needs effort, the level of detail for the sources of materials database should be appropriate for the factors influencing decision-making. NRC is interested in engaging with other organizations to develop a database for sources of materials for harvesting.

NRC's experience is that harvesting can yield highly representative and valuable data on materials aging, but these efforts may be expensive and challenging. Having a clearly defined objective and early engagement with other stakeholders, including the NPP from which harvesting will take place, are key to success. As specific harvesting opportunities are identified through this strategic approach, the NRC welcomes opportunities for cooperation and leveraging resources with other interested research organizations.

2

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Power Plants Attachments:

24-2017 - FINAL.docx Per IAEA:

Note to requester: Attachments are immediately following. The "IAEA-CN-246-082 Hiser 10-24-2017-FINAL.docx" attachment is also publicly available in ADAMS at ML17285A687. The "IAEA-CN-246-KS-6 Wilson 10-24-2017-FINAL.docx" attachment is also publicly available in ADAMS at ML17285A712.

Hiser, Allen Wed, 11 Oct 2017 05:56:39 -0600 Hiser, Matthew;Tregoning, Robert;Hull, Amy;Moyer, Carol Frankl, Istvan RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear IAEA-CN-246-082 Hiser 10-24-2017 - FINAL.docx, IAEA-CN-246-KS-6 Wilson 10-All presentations will be uploaded in advance to the conference PC. Please email you presentation and the full paper to email address: PLIM2@iaea.org by Wednesda__y, 18 October.

See attached 2 of the NRR papers as examples.

Allen From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 4:52 PM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy

<Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>

Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants

<< File: Harvesting NRC Poster for PLiM_cem_ptp (IF).pptx >> << File: Harvesting IAEA Plim 2 page synopsis final draft.docx >>

I can address #2 and #3.

2. No paper has been prepared, perhaps we can ask IAEA about whether that is still possible. If so, we could pull something together.

For background info, we have the draft PNNL report and workshop summary report that I can share. I've also attached the two page extended abstract that was originally submitted.

3. I am picking up the poster today as I leave and will try to get it mailed as soon as possible.

(see attached PP} Do you have an address to where it should be sent?

Thanks!

Matt 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 I 0D62

Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 8:32 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol

<Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Iyengar, Raj

<Raj. lyengar@nrc.gov>

Cc: Thomas, Brian <Brian.Thomas@nrc.gov>; Wilson, George <George.Wilson@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan

<lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants Allen:

Thanks for the head's up and for offering to make a presentation on this for RES. We're targeting to put together a 20 minute presentation on harvesting that we can discuss with you on Thursday morning. We'll also cover your points 2 and 3 at that time.

Cheers, Rob 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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 7:27 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol

<Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Iyengar, Raj

<Raj.Iyengar@nrc.gov>

Cc: Thomas, Brian <Brian.Thomas@nrc.gov>; Wilson, George <George.Wilson@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants Importance: High Another twist to the harvesting paper/presentation/poster for the PLiM conference.

I am willing to make a presentation at this "side event" if RES will put together slides - I would shoot for 20 minutes.

A couple of questions on this topic:

1. Can RES pull together a presentation in the next day or two, that we can discuss Thursday AM?

2. Has a paper been prepared (it appears from below that this is possible for inclusion in the conference proceedings)? If so, can I get a copy of it, or other background information.

3. When will the poster be available to be mailed to Lyon? (Can I get a copy of what it will look like?)

I am sure that other questions will arise.

Allen

---

Original Message-----

From: KANG, Ki-Sig [2]

Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 7:17 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Cc: KHAELSS, Martina <M.Khaelss@iaea.org>; KRIVANEK, Robert <R.Krivanek@iaea.org>; 4th PLiM Conference - Contact Point <4th-PLiM-Conference.Contact-Point@iaea.org>

Subject:

[External_Sender] Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants

Dear Allen,

Regarding " Harvesting of Aged Materials from Operating and Decommissioning Nuclear Power Plants", now this paper will be presented on poster session in programme.

I think all of participants will be very interesting to this topic. But we have no time slot to present in oral session. Thus I recommend to arrange a side event to introduce this topic from 13:20 -

14:00 on 24, Oct (Tuesday) 1if you want.

We can arrange the meeting room for presentation and discussion. Please think about and let me know.

Ki-Sig KANG Technical Head (PLiM/LTO)

Nuclear Power Engineering Section Division of Nuclear Power International Atomic Energy Agency Tel: +43 1 2600 22796 Fax: +43 1 2600 29598 E-mail: Ki-Sig.KANG@iaea.org This email message is intended only for the use of the named recipient. Information contained in this email message and its attachments may be privileged, confidential and protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to others. Also please notify the sender by replying to this message and then delete it from your system.

Applying the United States License Renewal Approach to an International Environment Alllen L. Hiser, Jr.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division of Materials and License Renewal Washington, DC Abstract. The approach used in the United States for license renewal (plant operation to 60 years) and subsequent license renewal (plant operation to 80 years) is implemented within a structured regulatory fram.ework that includes regulatory pro,ccss "essential elements" wl1ieh arc integrated to ensure continued safe plant operation. This integrated approach was evaluated by an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),

Integrated Reg\\llatoty Review Service mission in 20 ll0, in part using the IAEA Periodic Safety Review for comparison. This mission identified only one suggestion related to license renewal: the NRC should incorporate lessons learned from Periodic Safety Reviews performed in other countries as an input to the NRC's assessment processes. For international regulatory frameworks that do not include tlhese regulatory process "essential elements" or similar provisions, use of the license renewal approach followed in the United States may necessitate enhancement of the framework to include activities which achieve similar objectives, in order to ensure continued safe long term plant operation.

1. Background

In accordance with Section 103c of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended, nuclear power plants in the United States are licensed to operate for a term not exceeding 40 years, and may be renewed for up to 20 years. The NRC's regulations related to renewal of operating licenses for nuclear power plants are provided in Part 54 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (IO CFR Part 54), "Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants" [l]. 10 CFR 54.3fl(b) specifies that licenses may be renewed for a specified period not to exceed 20 years, with the renewed license term not to exceed 40 years.

In addition, 10 CFR 54.3l(d) states that a renewed license may be subsequently renewed in accordance with all applicable requireme*nts, with no explicit limit to the number of "subsequent" renewals for each license.

2. U.S. License Renewal Review Process The license renewal review implemented in the U.S. is a "limited scope" revi.ew, that focuses on aging management of long-lived, passive structures and components in nuclear power plants, such as the reactor pressure vessel, steam generators, piping, seismic Category l structures, electrical cables and connections, among others. The scope of the license renewal review includes:

(1) safety-related systems, structures, and components (SSCs)

(2) all nonsafety-related SSCs whose failme could adversely impact functionality of safety-related SSCs (3) all SSCs relied on in certain safety analyses or plant evaluations for specific NRC regulations.

This scope is generally consistent with IAEA safety guidance [2]. After in-scope SSCs have been identified, those structures and components (SCs) that are long-lived and passive are subject to aging management review (AMR). SCs that are not subject to AMR are those that are active, such that their failure will be identified during surveillance and testing in accordance with the Maintenance Rule of 10 CFR 50.65, or replaced on a fixed schedule.

The safety principles of the license renewal rule are:

(1) The ongoing regulatory process is adequate to ensure the safety of operating plants.

(2) The same plant operating rules apply during the renewal tenn (i.e., the plant current licensing basis (CLB) is to be maintained).

The combination of these principles means that plants are safe ( or the CLB for each plant is adequate) and the regulatory framework in place will ensure that plants will continue to be safe, in part by ensuring that the plant CLB is maintained. The CLB includes the NRC requirements applicable to a specific plant; a licensee's written commitments for ensuTing compliance with and operation within the applicable NRC requirements and the plant-specific design basis; orders; license conditions; exemptions; technical specifications; the plant-specific design-basis information documented in the most recent final safety analysis report, and the licensee's commitments remaining in effect that were made in docketed licensing correspondence such as responses to NRC bulletins, generic Letters, and enforcement actions, as well as I icensee commitments documented in NRC safety evaluations or licensee event reports.

The on-going regulatory process ofNRC, and how it works to ensure plant safety, w ill be described in a later section.

To assist in the implementation of the license renewal rule and to provide assurance that the CLB of each plant will be maintained, the NRC has developed several documents to aid in effective and efficient evaluation of license renewal applications (LRAs). The Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report (NUREG-1801) [3] provides generic evaluations of materials and environments to identify applicable aging effects and aging mechanisms, along with acceptable aging management approaches (e.g., aging management programs (AMPs)).

Use of the GALL report by applicants and NRC staff facilitates NRC review of LRAs and provides for a stable review process, subject to findings such as emergent technical issues.

The "Standard Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants," or SRP-LR (NUREG-1800) [4], provides guidance to the NRC staff reviewers in performing safety reviews of applications to renew nuclear power plant licenses in accordance with 10 CFR Part 54. The SRP-LR was developed to assure quality and uniformity of staff reviews and to present a well defined technical basis from which to evaluate a licensee's application. Availability of the SRP-LR aids in the transparency of NRC staff reviews of LRAs such that applicants can understand the types and detail of information needed by the staff in its reviews. The SRP-LR incorporates by reference the GALL Report.

Both the SRP-LR and the GALL Report were initially issued in 2001 and the last revision, Revision 2, was issued in 2011. Subsequent incremental changes to both the SRP-LR and the GALL Report have been implemented through the License Renewal Interim Staff Guidance (LR-ISG) process. A total of 10 LR-ISGs have been issued for Revision 2 of these documents, as listed on the NRC website.

Since 93 out of 99 operating units either have renewed licenses or have submitted LRAs, further full revisions of the SRP-LR and the GALL Report, e.g., Revision 3, will not be issued because of the limited number of plants that would use these reports.

With some plants in the U.S. approaching 50 years of operation, interest in extending licenses for a subsequent operating period to 80 years has been raised. To support subsequent license

renewal (SLR), the NRC has developed guidance documents analogous to those for license renewal, although they specifically address operating conditions to 80 years. The "Generic Aging Lessons Learned for Subsequent License Renewal (GALL-SLR) Rep01t" (NUREG-2191) [5] provides acceptable methods to manage aging effects for 80 years of plant operation. The "Standard Review Plan for Review of Subsequent License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants" (SRP-SLR) (NUREG-2192) [6] provides guidance to NRC staff reviewers to perform safety reviews of SLR applications.

A more detailed description of the U.S. license renewal process, which also applies to SLR, is provided in [7].

3. NRC On-going Regulatory Process The NRC on-going regulatory process includes a number of activities. Foremost are the requirements in regulations at Part 50 of Title IO of the U.S. Code of Federal Regu lations (IO CFR Part 50) [8], which plants are obliged to meet at all times. In particular, the Maintenance Rule of 10 CFR 50.65, the Quality Assurance Program of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, and the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55a, Codes and standards, provide the basic framework for aging management that apply from initial plant licensing.

The Mainte11ance Rule focuses on monitoring and testing activities to ensure that systems, structures and components are capable of performing their intended functions. The Quality Assurance Program requirements ensure that licensees programs meet quality standards and incorporate effective corrective actions on operating experience gained from their i.nspecti.on and testing. l O CFR 50.55a focuses on implementation of consensus industry standards, for inspection and testing as well as analysis of results to inform future inspections.

Other provisions to l O CFR Part 50 that provide aging management functions include regulations related to fire protection (10 CFR 50.48), e11vironmental qualification of electrical equipment (10 CFR 50.49), acceptance criteria for fracture prevention measures for light-water nuclear power reactors for normal operation (l O CFR 50.60), fracture toughness requirements for protection against pressurized thermal shock events (10 CFR 50.61 ), and alternate fracture toughness requirements (10 CFR 50.61 a), fracture toughness requirements (Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50), the reactor vessel materials surveillance program requirements (Appendix H to IO CFR Part 50), and pr1mary reactor containment leakage testing for water-cooled power reactors (Appendix J to IO CFR Part 50).

Besides compliance with the regulatio11s outlined above, other elements of the NRC regulatory process that provide a strong regulatory program to ensure safe plant operation include:

Resident inspectors who are Located on-site at each plant.

Frequent inspections out of our regional offices to assess perfonnance at each site, include such topics as plant security, emergency planning, radiation protection, environmental monitoring, and inservice inspection and testing.

A daily assessment of plant events, both domestic and international.

Safety issue resolutions for both generic issues and plant-specific issues.

In particular for materials aging and degradation issues that are important to safety, resolution of these issues can occur through a variety of approaches, including rule changes, generic communications, issuance of orders, and voluntary actions by plants themselves.

As described in [7], several other countries also utilize the U.S. license renewal process, in some cases as a combination with the periodic safety review (PSR) approach of SSG-25 [9]1.

All countries utilizing the U.S. approach should ensure that their regulatory framework achieves the same objectives as the U.S. on-going regulatory process essential elements outlined in this section.

4. Comparison with IAEA Long Term Operation Framework The IAEA framework for aging management and long term operation (L TO) stems from Specific Safety Requirements No. SSR-2/2 Rev. I [10]. Requirement 14: Ageing Management specifies "The operating organization shall ensure that an effective ageing management programme is implemented to ensure that required safety functions of systems, structures and components are fulfilled over the entire operating lifetime of the plant." In addition, Requirement 16: Programme for long term operation states "Where applicable, the operating organization shall establish and implement a comprehensive programme for ensuring the long term safe operation of the plant beyond a time-frame established in the licence conditions, design limits, safety standards and/or regulations."

To implement these requirements, the IAEA has issued Specific Safety Guide No. SSG-25, entitled "Periodic Safety Review," [9] and (in publication) SSG-48, entitled.. Ageing Management and Development of a Programme for Long Term Operation of Nuclear Power Plants" [2]. Supporting these SSGs are two Safety Reports and a Services Series report. One of the Safety Reports is Safety Reports Series No.. SRS-82, entitled "Ageing Management for Nuclear Power Plants: International Generic Ageing Lessons Learned (IGALL)" [ 11].

The scope of license renewal review is nearly equivalent to that of the J AEA guidance [2].

The license renewal exclusion of active SCs from aging management review is consistent with a provision (paragraph 5.17) of [2]. 111 addition, paragraph 4. 7 of [2] states "If national requirements do not require periodic safety review [in accordance with [2)), an alternative systematic comprehensive safety assessment that meets the objectives of the periodic safety review is recommended to be performed." The NRC on-going regulatory process activities described above represent the NRC activities that NRC contends are sufficient to meet the objectives of the PSR.

From the perspective of aging management, the elements of Chapter 5 ofSSG-48 [2] are very consistent with the license renewal approach. Specifically, the scoping process (and screening of active SCs in license renewal), the aging management review (AMR), AMPs, and time limited aging analyses described in Chapter 5 of SSG-48 [2] match those of the license renewal process. f urther, the AMR master table, AMPs, and TLAAs of SRS-82 are closely aligned with their counterparts in the GALL [3] and SRP-LR [4] reports.

5. IAEA International Regulatory Review Service Mission to U.S.

The IAEA conducted an Integrated Regulatory Review Service (IRRS) mission to the NRC i11 2010. The purpose of this IRRS mission was to review the regulatory framework for safety of the operating nuclear power plants in the United States and the effectiveness ofregulatory functions implemented by NRC. The review compared NRC standards against IAEA safety standards as the international benchmark for safety. The mission also provided exchange of information and experience between the IRRS Review Team and the U.S. counterparts in the areas covered by the IRRS mission. The IRRS mission also included Long-term Operation and Aging Management of nuclear power plants as a Regulatory Policy Issue for discussion.

The NRC prepared several documents for the IRRS that directly relate to license renewal [12]:

Elective Policy Issue #2: Long-Tenn Operation and Aging Management of Nuclear Facilities [13)

Module 11 A: Periodic Safety Review [14]

Module l lB: Feedback of Operating Experience [ 15]

White Paper: U.S. Approach to Enhancing Safety [16]

Module l lA on periodic safety review (PSR) provided NRCs perspective on how the NRC achieves the objectives of IAEA SSG-25 [9], through its comprehensive set of regulations, inspections and safety review programs. As stated in the paper: "'fhis paper presents an overview of the U.S. regulatory structure, salient features of the U.S. regulation consistent with the PSR approach, and a comparison between the safety factors in the PSR Safety Guide, and the comparable U.S. activities." From a self-assessment described in the paper, the NRC identified the need to review the findings from other PSRs more systematically to verify that international experience is fully evaluated for potential applicability to U.S. licensees. The IRRS mission report identified that the NRC has chosen an alternative approach to PSR, as described in paragraph 2.8 of SSG-25.

The TRRS mission identified the following Good Practices (GP) related to license renewal.

[ 17):

GP5: The NRC licensing process, and in particular the license renewal process is carried out in a very transparent manner, providing opp01tunities for hearing and public involvement. A number of meetings are held in the vici:nity of the plants to provide the public with information on the license renewal process, solicit input on the environmental review, and to provide the results of the NRC's inspections.

GPl 1: NRC has developed and implemented a robust operational experience feedback programme, including also guidance for safety enhancement and corrective actions recommended on the basis of lessons learned. The programme and a unique database are avai lable for sharing experiences with all interested parties both nationally and internationally.

GP12: NRC collects and documents unique generic lessons ]earned in U.S. from aging management, and is committed to continue to share them with nuclear community through the IAEA and other international channels as essential contribution to maintaining safety during long term operation of nuclear power plants.

In addition, the mission identified one suggestion related to license renewal [ 17), which is consistent with the NRC's self-assessment:

S9: NRC should incorporate lessons learned from PSRs perfo1med in other countries as an input to the NRC's assessment processes.

6. U.S. Participation in IAEA LTO Activities The IAEA has many activities related to LTO, including the establishment of related IAEA Safety Standards, the International Generic Aging Lessons Learned (IGALL) program, Safety Aspects of Long Te1m Operation (SAL TO) missions, and aging management and L TO workshops. The NRC has had strong participation in each of these activities, to support the sharing of technical information, operating experience, and perspectives on aging management and LTO.

From a recent perspective, the NRC has supported the development ofSSG-48 [2], bringing its perspective and extensive experience basis on aging management and L TO review for consideration in the development of the standard.

For the I GALL program, the NRC has been a consistent contributoT within the working groups and steering committee since the inception of the prngram. The initial development of the IGALL program was built upon the basis of the GALL Report, Revision 2, report, in particular the aging management review table (which describes materials, environments, aging effects and degradation mechanisms, and appropriate aging management programs) providing the starting point for the IGALL master table, and the GALL Report, Revision 2, AMPs. The influence of tbe GALL Report has continued in Phase 3 of the IGALL program, where the draft GALL-SLR document was used as one source of information in updating the TGALL master table, AMPs, and report. This participation has included serving as chairmen of working groups and subgroups, members of working groups and subgroups, and chairman of the steering committee.

The NRC has participated in numerous SAL TO missions around the world, including reviews of mechanical components, and civil structures, using its technical knowledge from participation in the IGALL program and reviews of License renewal applications. Similarly, the NRC has participated in numerous aging management and LTO, for both international regulators and for plant operators.

7. Summary The License Renewal Program in the U.S. is implemented within a larger on-going regulatory process with essential elements that ensures safe plant operation in all operating periods, from the initial 40 year operating period through operating periods with renewed licenses. The efficacy of the U.S. approach was validated through an IAEA lRRS mission, which identified several good practices and one suggestion.

Countries that rely on the U.S. license renewal approach should evaluate their overall regulatory framework to ensure that the functions of the U.S. on-going regulatory process essential elements are implemented within their framework, or consider enhancements to their framework.

References

1. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, 10 CFR Part 54, Requirements for renewal of operating licenses for nucleaT power plants, National Archives and Records Administration, USNRC (2017).

2. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Ageing Management and Development of a Programme for Long Term Operation of Nuclear Power Plants, SSG-48 (to be published).

3. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report, NUREG-1801, Revision 2, USNRC (2010).

4. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, Standai-d Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG-1800, Revision 2, USNRC (2010).

5. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, Generic Aging Lessons Learned for Subsequent License Renewal (GALL-SLR) Report, NUREG-2191, Vols. 1 and 2, USNRC (2017).

6. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, Standard Review Plan for Review of Subsequent License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG-2192, USNRC (2017).

7. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Approaches to Ageing Management in Member States: International Generic Ageing Les ons Learned (IGALL) Final Report, IAEA-TECDOC-1736 (2014).

8. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, 10 CFR Part 50, Domestic licensing of production and utilization faci lities, ational Archives and Records Adminjst::ration, USNRC (20 I 7).

9. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Periodic Safety Review for Nuclear Power Plants, SSG-25 (2013).

10. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Safety of Nuclear Power Plants:

Commissioning and Operation, Specific Safety Requirements No. SSR-2/2, Revision l (2016).

11. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC NERGY AGENCY, Ageing Management for Nuclear Power Plants: International Generic Ageing Lessons Learned (IGALL), SRS-82 (2015).

12. UNITED STAT S NUCL AR REGULATORY COMMISSION, 2011 lntegrat d Regulatory Review Service Mi ion to the United Stat

- Executive Summarie,

U NR, Ag ncywide Document Acces and Manag ment Sy t m (ADAMS)

Acee sion No. MLl 12510045 (2011).

13. UNITED STAT NU L AR REGULATORY OMMISSION, Elective Policy J u # 2: Long-Term Operation and Aging Manag m nt ofNucl ar Facilities, U NR, ADAM Acee sion

o. MLI 12510163 (2011).

14. UNITED TAT NU L AR REGULATORY OMMISSION, Module llA:

P riodic ty i

• R, ADAM Ace ion No. ML112510453 (2011).

15. UNITED T

NU R REGULATOR OMMI SION, Module 11B:

eedback of Operating xperience, USNR, ADAM Accession No. MLI 12510459 (2011).

16. UNITED TAT NU L AR REGULATORY OMMISSION, White Paper: U.S.

Approach to Enhancing Safety, U NR, ADAMS Acee ion

o. MLI 12510467 (2011).

17. INTERNATIONAL A.TOMI NERGY AGENCY, Integrated Regulatory Review ervice (IRRS) Report to the United States of America, IAEA-NS-IRRS-2010/02 (2010).

Assuring Safe Subsequent License Renewal for Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors in the USA George A. Wilson U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division of Materials and License Renewal Washington, DC Abstract. Renewal of licenses for operating nuclear power plants in the United States is a mature, stable process, with 86 reactors possessing renewed licenses for operation !o 60 years. Using the same regulatory process as initial license renewal, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued guidance documents to address subsequent license renewal, for plant operation to 80 years, in July 20 17. Although the license renewal (and subsequent license renewal) review is a I imited scope review that focuses on managing the effects of aging for long-lived, passive structures and components in nuclear power plants during the period of extended operation, the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has in place a number of regulatory programs (e.g., the analysis of the operating experience, the Reactor Oversight Process, the generic upgrades and regulatory changes, and the use of risk informed regulation) that are integrated to ensure safe plant operation at all stages, including the initial operating license period, the period of extend operation, and the subsequent period of extended operation. The combination of the existing on-going NRC regulatory processes with the detailed license renewal and subsequent license renewal reviews wi II corntinuc to ensure safe plant operation thrOLtgh the 80 year operating period.

1. Background

In accordance with Section 103c of the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954, as amended, nuclear power plants in the United States are licensed to operate for a term not exceeding 40 years, and may be renewed. This origii1al 40-year license term for reactor licenses was based on econom ic and antitrust considerations - not on limitations of nuclear technology.

The NRC's regulations related to renewal of operating licenses for nuclear power plants are provided in Patt 54 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 54).

l O CFR 54.31 (b) specifies that licet1ses may be renewed for a specified period not to exceed 20 years, with the renewed license term not to exceed 40 years. In addition, 10 CFR 54.3 l(d) states that a renewed license may be subsequently renewed in accordance with all applicable requirements, with no explicit limit to the number of "subsequent" renewals for each license.

2. Assuring Plant Safety in the First 40 Years of Operation From a regulatory perspective, plant safety is assured throughout the first 40 years of plant operation by an interrelated combination of regulations and guidance, licensing processes, oversight activities and consideration of operating experience, which provide for adequate protection of public health and safety at every point during the plant's life. The role of operating experience is a key element because it provides valuable information to adjust our oversight activities and, when necessary, to change regulations or requirements. This is accomplished as the issues are identified for both specific and generic plant activities.

Aging management begins during the plant design and construction phases, and is accomplished through a variety of means, within the context of our existing regulatory processes. Aging management is primarily accomplished through implementation of the NRC's regulations in Part 50 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR Part 50) [1]. In particular, the Maintenance Rule of IO CFR 50.65, the Quality Assurance Program of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50, and the requirements of IO CFR 50.55a, Codes and standards, provide the basic framework that assures adequate aging management for both active and! passive components and structures.

The Maintenance Rule focuses on monitoring and testing activities to ensure that systems, structures and components are capable of performing their intended functions. The Quality Assurance Program requirements ensure that licensees programs meet quality standards and incorporate effective corrective actions on operating experience gained from their inspection and testing. IO CFR 50.55a focuses on implementation of consensus industry standards, for inspection and testing as well as analysis of results to inform future inspections. Other provisions to 10 CFR Pai1 50 also provide aging management, such as the environmental qualification of electrical equipment (10 CFR 50.49) and the reactor vessel materials smveillance program requirements (Appendix H to LO CFR Part 50).

There are other elements of our regulatory process that provide reasonable assurance of safe plant operation. These elements include:

Resident inspectors who are Located on-site at each plant.

Frequent inspections out of our regional offices to assess performance at each site, include such topics as plant security, emergency planning, radiation protection, environmental monitoring, and inservice inspection and testing.

A daily assessment of plant events, both domestic and international.

Safety issue resolutions for both generic issues and plant-specific issues.

In particular for materials aging and degradation issues that are important to safety, resolution of these issues can occur through a variety of approaches, including rule changes, generic communications, issuance of orders, a11d voluntary plant actions.

3. Assuring Plant Safety from 40 to 60 Years - License RenewaE Review and Guidance Plant safety in the operating period from 40 to 60 years follows the same processes and framework identified previously for the first 40 years, with the exception that additional aging management is implemented for operation beyond 40 years. The requirements to identify and implement tbe additional aging management are established through development of a specific regulation for license renewal, 10 CFR Part 54, "Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for N uclear Power Plants" [2]. The NRC licensing process ensures the implementation of both generic and plant-specific aging management programs (AMPs) that include operating experience to ensure components. continue to perfom1 their intended functions. The NRC's inspection programs verify licensee implementation of the aging management programs.

The scope of license renewal includes (1) safety-related systems, structures, and components (SSCs); (2) all nonsafety-related SSCs whose failure could adversely impact functionality of safety-related SSCs; and (3) all SSCs relied on in certain safety analyses or plant evaluations for specific NRC regulations. After in-scope SSCs have been identified, those structures and components (SCs) that long-lived and passive, such as the reactor pressure vessel, steam generators, piping, seismic Category I structures, electrical cables and connections, among others, are subject to aging management review (AMR). SCs that are not subject to AMR are those that are active, such that their failure will be identified during surveillance and testing in accordance with the Maintenance Rule, or replaced on a fixed schedule.

The fundamental premise of the License Renewal Rule, provided at IO CFR Pai1 54, is that the current licensing basis (CLB) for plants is adequate to ensure the safety of operating plants. In this case the CLB includes the NRC requirements applicable to a specific plant; a licensee's written commitments for ensuring compliance with and operation within the applicable NRC requirements and the plant-specific design basis; orders;. license conditions;

exemptions; technical specifications; the plant-specific design-basis information documented in the most recent final safety analysis report, and the licensee's commitments remaining in effect that were made in docketed licensing correspondence such as responses to NRC bulletins, generic letters, and enforcement actions, as well as licensee commitments documented in NRC safety evaluations or licensee event reports.

A basic aspect of the License Renewal Rule is a licensee's integrated plant assessment that demonstrates that the SCs requiring AMR have been identified and the effects of aging on their functionality will be managed in order to maintain the CLB such that there is an acceptable leve I of safety during the period of extended operation from 40 to 60 years.

License renewal also involves applicant consideration of time-limited aging analyses (TLAAs), which are those licensee calculations and analyses in the CLB for the SSCs within the scope of license renewal. Each application must include a supplement to the environmental report that complies with the requirements of Subpart A of 10 CFR Part 51 [3].

The NRC has developed several documents to aid in effective and efficient evaluation of license renewal applications (LRAs). The Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report (NUREG-1801) [4] provides generic evaluations of materials and environments to identify applicable aging effects and aging mechanisms, along with acceptable aging management approaches (e.g., AMPs). Use of the GALL Report by applicants and N RC staff facilitates NRC review of LRAs and provides for a stable review process, subject to findings such as emergent technical issues.

The "Standard Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants," or SRP-LR (NUREG-1800) [5], provides guidance to the NRC staff reviewers in performing safety reviews of applications to renew nuclear power plant licenses in accordance with 10 CFR Part 54. The SR.P-LR was developed to assure quality and uniformity of staff reviews and to present a well defined technical basis from which to evaluate a licensee's application. Availability of the SRP-LR aids in the h*ansparency of NRC staff reviews of LRAs such that applicants can understand the types and detai I of information needed by the staff in its reviews. The SRP-LR incorporates by reference the GALL Report.

Both the SRP-LR and the GALL Report were initially issued in 2001 and the last revision, Revision 2, was issued in 2011. Subsequent changes to both the SRP-LR and the GALL Report have been implemented through the License Renewal Interim Staff Guidance (LR-ISG) process, wherein incremental changes are made to these documents. A total of l O LR-ISGs have been issued for Revision 2 of these documents, as listed on the NRC website.

It should be noted that further full revisions of the SRP-LR and the GALL Report, e.g.,

Revision 3, will not be issued because of the limited number of plants that would use these reports.

A more detailed description of the license renewal process is provided in TECDOC-1736 [ 6].

4. Assuring Plant Safety from 40 to 60 Years - Subsequent License Renewal With the maturity of license renewal, utilities have expressed an interest in renewing their licenses for an additional 20 years. 'Ihis is called "subsequent license renewal," or SLR, consistent with the terminology of 10 CFR 54.31 ( d). The Commission has stated that the license renewal rule has provided an effective basis for ensuring safe operation during the license renewal period and will continue to be an effective basis for SLR. Thus the process for SLR is the same as that for license renewal. Consistent with the license renewal rule, the focus

of SLR is on the adequacy of additional aging management activities to ensure safe plant operation during the subsequent period of extended operation.

To support SLR, the N RC has developed guidance documents analogous to those for license renewal, although they specifically address operating conditions to 80 years. The "Generic Aging Lessons Learned for Subsequent License Renewal (GALL-SLR) Repo11" (NUREG-2191) [7] provides acceptable methods to manage aging effects for 80 years of plant operation. The "Standard Review Plan for Review of Subsequent License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants" (SRP-SLR) (NUREG-2192) [8] provides guidance to NRC staff reviewers to perform safety reviews of SLR applications.

Revisions of the license renewal guidance documents have focused on operating experience, specifically the lessons learned and findings from these events. Because plants have operated for less than 50 years, other infonnation beyond an exclusive reliance on operating experience was used to identify and address the aging concerns for the operating period up to 80 years.

In 2014, the NRC Office of N uclear Regulatory Research, in collaboration with the U.S.

Department of Energy, published the five volume **Expanded Materials Degradation Assessment," known as the EMDA [9]. This study covered 80 years of operation and systems, strnctures, and components, including core internals, piping systems, the reactor pressure vessel (RPV), electrical cabJes, and concrete and civil structures. The EMDA used the phenomena identification and ranking table, the PIRT approach, wherein an expert panel is convened to rank potential degradation scenarios according to their judgment of susceptibility and current state of knowledge.

At the invitation of Constellation Energy and Duke Energy, NRC staff conducted "AMP Effectiveness Audits" at three plants that were operating in their period of extended operation.

The purpose of these information collecti.on audits was to understand how their AMPs have been implemented and how effective their AMPs were in identifying aging and unexpected aging phenomena. The findings from these audits were used with information from other sources to inform the AMPs for subsequent license renewal.

The staff also searched international and national operating experience databases for age-related operating experience since the last revision of the license renewal guidance in 20 11.

In addition, comments from stakeholders were collected during public meetings and a public comment period, as well as comments from the staff.

To develop the SLR guidance document, the NRC created ninety-seven internal expert panels to review and d!isposition the comments and issues. These panels started with the Revision 2 versions of the GALL Report and the SRP-LR that were developed for license renewal. The panels then reviewed and deliberated on the information provided by the sources identified above. Draft SLR guidance documents (the GALL-SLR Report and the SRP-SLR) were then made available for public conunent. Subsequently, the staff held public meetings to provide interested! stakeholders information on the disposition of the expert panels and to solicit stakeholder comments. The SRP-SLR and GALL-SLR Report were issued as final documents in July 2017.

5. Status of License Renewal and Subsequent License Renewal As of the September 2017, licenses have been renewed for a total of 89 nuclear power plant units in the U.S., with 86 units out ofa population of99 units operating with renewed licenses. An additional 7 units have applications under review and 4 units have stated an

intent to apply for license renewal between 2020 and 2022. Forty-seven units will be in the operating period beyond 40 years by the end of 201 7.

The U.S. nuclear industry has expressed intent to apply for subsequent license renewal, to enable plant operation to 80 years. These include one application by the end of2017, and one application each in 2018 and 2019.

6. Technical Issues for Subsequent License Renewal Based on various workshops, evaluations and public discussion, there has been a consensus that the top four technical issues to provide assurance of safe operation of nuclear power plants for operation from 60 to 80 years are:

Neutron embrittlement of the reactor pressme vessel Confirm predictive methods using operating experience and Assess embrittlement at higher fluerice levels Stress corrosion cracking and other types of degradation of reactor pressure vessel internals Evaluate impacts of irradiation assisted stress corrosion cracking, loss of fracture toughness, and void swelling Test materials at higher fluence levels Concrete and containment degradation to Evaluate effects of alkali-silica reaction on structural performance of concrete Confirm structural integrity for susceptible plant configurations Electrical cable qualification and condition monitoring to Evaluate effects of gamma radiation and thermal exposure in low voltage cables Confirm assessment of medium voltage cable submergence qualification It is industry's responsibility to develop the technical basis for long-term operation. Lacking resolution of these issues on a generic basis, the first SLR applications will need to add:ress each of these issues on a plant-specific basis as necessary. Once generic resolutions of these topics are identified, the NRC will implement the technical resolutions into the SLR process.

The NRC Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research is collaborating on research activities to address these topics with both domestic indust1y organizations (l.e., E lectric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)) as well as international partners.

7. Conclusions The NRC's License Renewal Program has successfully evaluated and renewed licenses for more than 80% of the fleet of operating nuclear power plants in the United States. These reviews have focused on ensuring that licensees have adequate aging management in place to ensure safe plant operation during the period of extended operation to 60 years. The limited focus review of license renewal is supported by many other activities in the NRC's on-going regulatory process, including some essential elements identified previously.

With the development of guidance documents for subsequent license renewal, the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission is positioned to review SLR applications, subject to plant-specific consideration of certain technical issues. In conjunctions with the on-going regulatory process, this will ensure safe plant dming the subsequent period of extended operation, out to a possible 80 years of operating time.

References

1. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO.MMISSION, 10 CFR Part 50, Domestic licensing of production and utilization facilities, National Archives and Records Administration, USNRC, 2017.

2. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO.MMISSION, 10 CFR Part 54, Requirements for renewal of operating licenses for nuclear power plants, National Archives and Records Administration, USNRC, 201 7.

3. UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO.MMISSION, subpa1t A of 10 CFR Part 51, National Environmental Policy Act-Regulations Implementing Section 102(2), National Archives and Records Administration, USNRC 2012.

4. UNITED STAT S NUCL AR REGULATORY CO.MMISSION, Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report, NUREG-1801, Revision 2, USNRC, December 2010.

5. UNITED STAT S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, Standard Review Plan for Review of License Renewal Applications for Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG-1800, Revi ion 2, USNRC, December 2010.

6. "Approaches to Ageing Management in Member States: International Generic Ageing Lessons Learned (IGALL) Final Report," IAEA-TECDOC-1736, 2014.

7. UNITED STAT S NUCL AR REGULATORY OMMISSlON, Generic Aging L

on Learned for Sub qu nt Lie n R n wal (GALL-LR) Report, NUREG-2191, Vols. 1 and 2, USNR, July 2017.

8. UNITED STAT NU L AR REGULATORY OMMISSION, Standard Review Plan for Revi w of Sub equ nt Licen Renewal Application for Nucl ar Power Plant, NUREG-2 192, US RC, July 2017.

9. UNITED TAT NU L AR REGULATORY OMMISSION, Expanded Material Degradation A e ment (EMDA), UREG/ R-7153, Volum 1-5, U NR, Octob r 2014.

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Hi Steve, Hiser, Matthew Fri, 29 Jan 2016 19:07:56 +0000 Frankl, Istvan Hull, Amy RE: Harvesting One Pager That sounds good to me. I also would have no problem with Aloysius taking over GSl-191 as well. It matches his background in CSGB well. At this point, it has mostly been supporting NRR as requested on reviewing submittals with the support of our chemical effects expert.

I am... l ______..--__.~ nd my calendar should be up to date for next week.

Thanks!

Matt (b)(6).

From: Frankl, Istvan Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 12:53 PM To: Hiser, Matthew Cc: Hull, Amy

Subject:

RE: Harvesting One Pager Thanks, Matt.

I implemented your clarifications in the attachment.

I will schedule meeting with Aloysius and you for early next week to discuss this assignment.

am also thinking about reassigning the GSl-191 effort to him. Any thoughts on this?

Steve From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 12:16 PM To: Frankl, Istvan Cc: Hull, Amy

Subject:

RE: Harvesting One Pager Hi Steve, OK, I accepted your revisions (attached). To answer your questions:

1. What is the status of UNR?

a. As far as I know, Amy has had some limited discussion with DLR staff and management and they support this effort and would like to put in UNR. I don't think there has been much more progress made on that front, which is something that Aloysius could hopefully lead.

2. Is this a different UNR, or the new one?

Thanks!

Matt

a. I was referring to the same one as above. There are already UNRs for RES support for SLR, so whether it is "updating" those old ones or creating a "new" UNR from scratch is not much different in my mind.

From: Frankl, Istvan Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 12:00 PM To: Hiser, Matthew Cc: Hull, Amy

Subject:

RE: Harvesting One Pager Thanks, Matt.

Nice one-pager.

I have a few comments and revisions. Please see the attachment for details.

Thanks, Steve From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 10:05 AM To: Frankl, Istvan; Hull, Amy

Subject:

Harvesting One Pager Hi Steve and Amy, Please find attached the one-pager on the harvesting project to help facilitate transition with Aloysius.

Thanks!

Matt

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Attachments:

Hi Steve, Hiser, Matthew Fri, 29 Jan 201617:16:14 +0000 Frankl, Istvan Hull, Amy RE: Harvesting One Pager Harvesting One Pager.docx Note to requester: Attachment is immediately following.

OK, I accepted your revisions (attached). To answer your questions:

1. What is the status of UNR?

a. As far as I know, Amy has had some limited discussion with DLR staff and management and they support this effort and would like to put in UNR. I don't think there has been much more progress made on that front, which is something that Aloysius could hopefully lead.

2. Is this a different UNR, or the new one?

Thanks!

Matt

a. I was referring to the same one as above. There are already UNRs for RES support for SLR, so whether it is "updating" those old ones or creating a "new" UNR from scratch is not much different in my mind.

From: Frankl, Istvan Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 12:00 PM To: Hiser, Matthew Cc: Hull, Amy

Subject:

RE: Harvesting One Pager Thanks, Matt.

Nice one-pager.

I have a few comments and revisions. Please see the attachment for details.

Thanks, Steve From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, January 29, 2016 10:05 AM To: Frankl, Istvan; Hull, Amy

Subject:

Harvesting One Pager Hi Steve and Amy, Please find attached the one-pager on the harvesting project to help facilitate transition with Aloysius.

Thanks!

Matt

Strategic Approach to Ex-Plant Harvesting (1/29/2016)

Background

Understanding the causes and control of degradation mechanisms forms the basis for developing aging management programs (AMPs) to ensure the functionality and safety margins of NPP systems, structures, and components (SSC). The resolution to these issues should provide reasonable assurance of safe operation of the components in the scope of license renewal during the subsequent period of extended operation.

In many cases, the scientific basis for understanding and predicting long-term environmental degradation behavior of materials in NPPs is incomplete. A strategic approach to the harvesting, examination and testing of materials and components from decommissioned reactors can dramatically increase our knowledge-acquisition rate in this very important area.

This project is to develop a strategic approach to ex-plant harvesting and was originally conceived and initiated through the NRC's Long-Term Research Program (L TRP).

Facts A new task order (NRC-HQ-60-15-T-0023) was pllaced with the Pacific Northwest National Lab (PNNL) Enterprise Wide Agreement (NRC-HQ-25-14-D-0001) in September 2015 to support NRC in developing a strategic approach to ex-plant harvesting. Task 1 focuses on a scoping study to pull in information from other sources (EMDA; GALL; ASME code; etc.) to populate an information tool that will allow the prioritization of harvesting opportunities.

An internal NRC working group consisting of staff from RES and NRR was formed to advise the strategic harvesting effort.

NRR/DLR staff and management have expressed strong support and interest in this project and intend to develop a user need request (UNR) to support this effort in the context of Subsequent License Renewal (SLR).

Status Under Task 1 of the task order, PNNL is currently working on developing examples for dissimilar metal welds and cables of what type of information will be captured and how it will be presented.

The working group has met once in December and has another meeting scheduled for February to review some information put together by PNNL.

Next Steps By mid-February, PNNL should provide examples for dissimilar metal welds and cables in the information tool. This will allow NRC (likely through the working group) to review what type of information will be captured and how it will be presented.

NRC staff should work with PNNL to organize a public workshop to discuss the topic of ex-plant harvesting and engage relevant stakeholders, particularly EPRI, industry, and DOE that can help provide information and cooperation in these efforts.

RES staff should work with NRR staff to develop an updated UNR incorporating this strategic harvesting effort.

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

All's well...

Hiser, Allen Mon, 23 Oct 2017 07:02:32 -0600 Hiser, Matthew;Tregoning, Robert RE: Harvesting Poster

---

Original Message --------

From: "Hiser, Matthew" <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Date: Mon, October 23, 2017 3:00 PM +0200 To: "Hiser, Allen" <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>, "Tregoning, Robert" <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster They should be the same ones I sent to IAEA...

About the poster, I followed the size requirement - didn't catch until just now that it was supposed to be portrait orientation.... Oops!

http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Meetings/PDFplus/2017/cn246/cn246PosterGuidelines.pdf From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 8:54 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster Poster arrived in good condition. Poster space was 1 meter wide, but there was an internal corner bay "next door" that I could utilize.

Hopefully the slides I am prepared for are the same ones IAEA has! @

---

Original Message --------

From: "Hiser, Matthew" <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Date: Mon, October 23, 2017 2:45 PM +0200 To: "Tregoning, Robert" <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>, "Hiser, Allen" <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster Here's the latest version of the paper (at division level management for approval).

I also attached the slides, which I had sent a couple weeks back.

Did the poster make it to the hotel?

Thanks for presenting and good luck!

Matt From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 8:41 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster Allen:

Do you have the final presentation and latest version of the paper? I'll ask Matt to send you the latest version just in case. Then you can peruse the paper for some additional information.

Thanks again for covering......

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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 8:38 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matt hew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Poster Importance: High FYI - The poster presentation has gone from lunchtime to in-session in 1.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> due to a cancellation.

Any last minute thoughts to convey?

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Tregoning, Robert Mon, 23 Oct 2017 06:55:50 -0600 Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Poster Thanks matt for closing the loop on this; I didn't think I had the latest version of the paper to send....

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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 8:45 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster Here's the latest version of the paper (at division level management for approval).

I also attached the slides, which I had sent a couple weeks back.

Did the poster make it to the hotel?

Thanks for presenting and good luck!

Matt From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 8:41 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster Allen:

Do you have the final presentation and latest version of the paper? I'll ask Matt to send you the latest version just in case. Then you can peruse the paper for some additional information.

Thanks again for covering......

RT Robert Tregoning Technical Advisor for Materials

US Nuclear Regulatory Comm ission 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: Hiser, Allen Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 8:38 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Poster Importance: High FYI - The poster presentation has gone from lunchtime to in-session in 1.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> due to a cancellation.

Any last minute thoughts to convey?

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Thanks, Carol.

Frankl, Istvan Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:44:21-0400 Moyer, Carol Hull, Amy;Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting poster abstract The proposal for the poster looks good. I will pass it along to the TA.

Steve From: Moyer, Carol Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 7:52 AM To: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

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

Subject:

Harvesting poster abstract

Steve, The attached abstract is for a RIC poster on harvesting. Please edit it, if necessary.

I am planning to go to the Standards Forum this morning, so if this needs changes, please feel free to make them.

At the Standards Forum, I will mention that we are starting to look at standards for AM, including having participated in an ANSI collaborative program kick-off. I will not specifically "plug" the public meeting that we are planning for this fall, since we do not have full management buy-in on that just yet.

Carol

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hiser, Allen Mon, 23 Oct 2017 13:28:14 -0600 Tregoning, Robert;Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Poster Yep, I knew most of the "facts", but I was not going to share that in a later discussion with an IAEA staffer from Japan!

From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 3:26 PM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster Thanks for feedback Allen and once again for covering the presentation for us.

Just FYI, we did consider the Japanese effort a few years ago but the driver behind that program was basically the Japanese industry and government looking to get funding out of a decommissioning plant without considering whether the materials in the plant had any real worth w.r.t. outstanding technical issues. Also, cloaking this effort as an IAEA-CRP, at least in the US, was viewed negatively because it didn't appear that IAEA was adding any substantive value and would only add to the cost of such an effort. The outcome of that "effort" was to make it clear that the Japanese should pursue any harvesting partners directly, outside of IAEA. Not surprisingly, nothing else came of the activity when it became apparent that countries were not going to line up to hand out money for something so ill-defined. In fact, it was, in part, the abject failure of this particle effort that made it apparent that we needed a better strategy related to harvesting and not what we've done in the past which is to just grab stuff from plants that present themselves as "opportunity targets". Note that my bias and cynicism has been added to the summary of this effort.

Cheers, Rob 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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 2:42 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster

The presentation went OK.

The session was scheduled to end at 5:40 but I didn't start until 5:55 and ended at about 6:15. I am not sure of how they managed to get so far behind, since I had a GALL/GALL-SLR paper in a different session at the same time.

The only substantive comment was a question about whether we had considered the Japanese effort a few years ago that was cloaked in an IAEA CRP. My response was that we prefer multilateral collaborations. I said that I wo1uld pass the comment on - here it is.

Allen From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 9:01 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster They should be the same ones I sent to IAEA...

About the poster, I followed the size requirement - didn't catch until just now that it was supposed to be portrait orientation.... Oops!

http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Meetings/PDF plus/2017 /cn246/cn246PosterGuidelines.pdf From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 8:54 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster Poster anived in good condition. Poster space was 1 meter wide, but there was an internal comer bay "next door" that I could utilize.

Hopefully the slides I am prepared for are the same ones IAEA has! @

---

Original Message --------

From: "Hiser, Matthew" <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Date: Mon, October 23, 2017 2:45 PM +0200 To: "Tregoning, Robert" <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>, "Hiser, Allen" <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster Here's the latest version of the paper (at division level management for approval).

I also attached the slides, which I had sent a couple weeks back.

Did the poster make it to the hotel?

Thanks for presenting and good luck!

Matt From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 8:41 AM To: Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Poster Allen:

Do you have the final presentation and latest version of the paper? I'll ask Matt to send you the latest version just in case. Then you can peruse the paper for some additional information.

Thanks again for covering......

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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Allen Sent: Monday, October 23, 2017 8:38 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Poster Importance: High FYI - The poster presentation has gone from lunchtime to in-session in 1.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> due to a cancellation.

Any last minute thoughts to convey?

From:

Hiser, Matthew Sent:

Wed, 5 Sep 2018 17:59:15 +0000 To:

Subject:

Tregoning, Robert;Purtscher, Patrick;Audrain, Margaret RE: harvesting presentation for NRC/NRA meeting Yeah, I just looked back - there was no second sub-bullet there on the first version of what we sent you.

Somehow I managed to add that second sub-bullet when I was adding the slide on the workshop... I don't think there was any burning point there I was trying to add From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2018 1:53 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>;

Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: harvesting presentation for NRC/NRA meeting I might add something there but just wanted to see if there was a burning point that you guys were meaning to make....

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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2018 1:15 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>;

Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: harvesting presentation for NRC/NRA meeting I would just delete that second sub-bullet, I think the first bullet covers the thought we were trying to convey...

Thanks!

Matt From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2018 11:07 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>;

Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: harvesting presentation for NRC/NRA meeting You could consider replacing "Developing" w ith " Proposing new protocol for harvesting"?

Pat From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2018 10:56 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>;

Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

harvesting presentation for NRC/NRA meeting Guys:

Slide 6, 2nd sub-bullet of first bullet just says "Developing". What point did you want to articulate here?

Thanks, Rob Robert Tregoning Technical Advisor for Materials US Nuclear Regulatory Comm ission 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:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Sure Q Hiser, Matthew Wed, 5 Sep 2018 18:53:03 +0000 Sircar, Madhumita RE: Harvesting Prioritization Follow-up From: Sircar, Madhumita Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2018 2:53 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Prioritization Follow-up

Matt, Can we move this meeting to Monday, Sep 10th?

Thanks, olftut

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2018 10:14 AM To: Hiser, Matthew; Sircar, Madhumita

Subject:

Harvesting Prioritization Follow-up When: Thursday, September 06, 201811:00 AM-11:30 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p

Note to requester: The attachments are immediately following.

From:

Hiser, Matthew Sent:

Fri, 14 Sep 2018 18:09:23 +0000 Kirk, Mark To:

Cc:

Gordon, Matthew;Tregoning, Robert;Raynaud, Patrick

Subject:

RE: Harvesting prioritization for RPV Attachments:

Copy of Harvesting Needs Prioritization 8-31-18 rlt.xlsx, Harvesting Needs Prioritization 8-31-18 [+MTK].xlsx Hi Mark, Thank you for taking a look at this prioritization and providing your input. I took a look at this for the sake of consistency with how we've done the ranking in other areas (not that it will ever be perfect, but just a high-level look). I had a couple comments/ questions that stood out to me:

1.

For the "regulatory considerations" field, you didn't put a ranking and indicated RPV embrittlement isn't (and realistically can't be) inspected for. For that field, we're thinking about the context for regulating the relevant component. In many instances, it is inspections. (For example, if there is no good way to inspect a component, we'd probably rate it high for harvesting since we need to have high confidence in how it will behave if we can't inspect for flaws.) However, for the RPV, although it isn't directly inspected, the use of surveillance specimens is a critical aging management activity that provides confidence in the material performance during extended operations. That, along with specific considerations for 80 years (how well will surveillance specimens be able to address higher fluences?), would be what I would focus on for that criteria. In my mind, that's probably driving you to a Mor ML given the surveillance specimens, but that's from a non-RPV expert perspective.

2.

For the second row on comparing Charpy to direct measurement approaches, you've got a MH for the importance of harvested materials over lab aging. Do you really have to have harvested materials in order to compare the Charpy and direct measurement approaches? That seems to me like something that doesn't really have to be done with harvested materials, but could be accomplished through a test reactor irradiation as well. But maybe there's a good reason it would need to be from real ex-plant materials.

(b )(6)

I also received some input from Rob, which I wanted to share with this gro'up for consideration and consolidation with Mark's input. I know Rob and Patrick are!

• I so this might take a little while to get everyone's thoughts incorporated, but appreciate your efforts to give us your input.

Hopefully with everyone back the week after next we can finalize this for RES.

Thanks!

Matt From: Kirk, Mark Sent: Monday, September 10, 2018 9:28 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>

Cc: Gordon, Matthew <Matthew.Gordon@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>;

Raynaud, Patrick <Patrick.Raynaud@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Re: Harvesting prioritization for RPV

Matt -

See attached. I added some explanations for my ranking, although t hey may be somewhat cryptic.

Let me know if you need more explanation.

mark From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, September 10, 2018 8:40 AM To: Kirk, Mark

Subject:

RE: Harvesting prioritization for RPV Thanks Mark!

From: Kirk, Mark Sent: Monday, September 10, 2018 8:36 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Gordon, Matthew <Matthew.Gordon@nrc.gov>;

Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Cc: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Re: Harvesting prioritization for RPV Matt -

Thanks for the reminder. This fell off of my radar. I will reply later today.

mark From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, September 10, 2018 7:27 AM To: Kirk, Mark; Gordon, Matthew; Tregoning, Robert Cc: Purtscher, Patrick; Audrain, Margaret

Subject:

RE: Harvesting prioritization for RPV Hi guys, I just wanted to follow up on this earlier email to see if you have had the opportunity to take a look at this. Ideally we'd like to have something to compile with the other areas by the end of this week.

Thanks!

Matt

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 1 Office: TWFN 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, August 31, 2018 9:36 AM To: Kirk, Mark <Mark.Kirk@nrc.gov>; Gordon, Matthew <Matthew.Gordon@nrc.gov>;

Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Cc: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret

<Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting prioritization for RPV I should also say, please feel free to add or subtract from the rows (ie propose new or eliminate from consideration certain RPV harvesting needs) and to provide feedback (edits, comments, etc.) on the criteria and the guidance to use the criteria.

Thanks!

Matt From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, August 31, 2018 9:33 AM To: Kirk, Mark <Mark.Kirk@nrc.gov>; Gordon, Matthew <Matthew.Gordon@nrc.gov>;

Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Cc: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret

<Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting prioritization for RPV Hi Mark, Matt, and Rob, We would like to request your input as the RPV technical experts on the prioritization of harvesting opportunities for RPV materials. I have attached a template of the prioritization of harvesting needs in the non-RPV metals area. Can you follow that template (check the scoring guidance on the first sheet) to provide input for the RPV technical area?

Ideally, it would be good if we could receive your input in the next two weeks by September 14. We're hopiing to pull all of the input from the different areas into a broader harvesting draft deliverable to share with NRR for feedback by October.

Please me know if you have any questions.

Thanks!

Matt 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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

Criteria Title Crilicalness of Technical Gap Addressed Importance of Harvested Materials over Laboratory Aging Applicability to US Operating Fleet Regulatory Considerations Related to Inspections and AMPs Harvesting cost and complexity Timeliness of results Availability of materials for harvesting Description Harvesting to address critical gaps should be prioritized over less essential technical saps Key considerations are the ease of laboratory replication of aging mechanism and unique. field aspects of the aging mechanism.

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 arc 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 unique field aspects, legacy materials (e.g., fabrication methods, comr>0sition) 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 oblained from other sources with represen1ative properties.

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.

If mature inspection methods exist and are easy to apply to monitor degradation, harvesting may be less valuable. lfinspeclion methods do not exist. harvesting may be essential 10 ensure confidence in the assessment of age-related degradation in that particular component.The less confidence that NRC staff has in the Scoring Guidance H = high risk significance/ little to no available data MH = Medium-high risk significance/

limited data available M = Moderate risk significance I some data available ML= low to moderate risk signficance /

sufficient data available for regulatory decisions L = Low risk significance I large amount of data available H = Nearly Impossible to replicate service enviroment I critically important to use harvested materials MH = Challenging to replicate service enviromenl / important lo use harvested materials M = Possible with some limitations to replicate service enviroment / moderately important to u:.e harve:.ted material:.

ML= Not challenging to replicate service enviroment I less important to use harvested materials L = Very easy to replicate service enviroment I not important to use harvested materials H = All plants MH=AII PWRs M = All BWRs or most PWRs ML= ~10-15 plants L = <5 plants H = No or very limited inspection methods available / low confidence in AMPs MH = Limited inspection methods available / low-to-moderate confidence in AMPs M = Some inspection methods available I moderate confidence in AMPs efTectiveness of the relevant AMP, the higher priority for harves1ing. ML= Good inspection methods available

/ medium-high confidence in AMPs Activities with higher costs and complexity are less attractive than similar activities wilh lower costs and 1hat are simpler to execute..

For example, harvesting unirradiated concrete or electrical cables is less expensive and less complex than harvesting from the RPV internals or 1he RPV.

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 dala need is c\\e.arly essential and increases the priority.

L = Effective, well-accepted inspection methods exist/ high confidence in AMPs 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 H = High MH = Medium-high M = Medium ML= Medium-low L = Low

Basic Info Technlcal Criteria Proiect s-- Ifie Purposa / TSting Criticalness of Technical lmporta11ce of Harvested Regulatory Considerations Cost I Complexity Timeliness. of Av11llablllty of Need De.scrlpUon Plannad Technic al K nowledge Gained Gap Addressed Mal*rial& over Laboratory Aging Al)l)llcabllhy to US Operating Fleet R elated to Inspections and AMPS Score Average Basis for Technic al Priority results m aterials for harvesting RPV Score Comment Score Comment Scor,e Comment Score Comment Score Comment The results would be limefy Ttie aitteou:atton models if they are have the le-ast amoui,t or d9...,91oped This work has beE!fl supporting information Material is irradiated before 2024 or done before but the compared t o other 9$pe,cls which will.iffect all so tocoincicle adC,itiOna!work Ther~ are not many studies Vv'hlle the Information stioold be related to RPV The 8'tlenut1tion stuc,y ls sllgtitty a,spectsofspecimen........

Shol.ldl'ocuson that irTadiate 6 to 9 ind"ies generieally appri(;al)le, ii. for embrittleme nt. HOWIJ'ler, rnc,re important to me,, jusl preparation anc, additional Othe r than Zion higer fluE!floeS to of ste.el so, from that some reason, the results.are studies to date have because there are fewer such testing. Fisther.

rlformaoon materials. I'm RPV - Hl!l'ftuence&hlgh Meast.1re fluenoe, verify that the standpoint, getting only appllc&ble to Mhlgh fluenceM vahd ated the st!Jdles that have been oone.

taking !Speclmeos at bel.ng collected n04 owareof Shift Y'eSS91 wi1h well-toughn.ess. & CMmiStry as attenuation trends specimens from an RPV materials/locatiOns. this might conservativism 04 existing Being able to confirm expected several th1ough-from industl)I otha-1 RPVs that etSU!blished unirrediated a fund ian of through-Through thickness section to valida te expected are are importanl for studying result in less relevance I() lower efflenuatiom models,used Fl trends al higher fluence levels ihdness locations survielanoe are available ior

- ~-

nies thickne,!j,JJ nositk;tn fluenoe & :;11ter1,1ation mQodel, M

maintaiined.

M H a1ter1,1atiQn M

flueooe Ian~ r.-.cludino BVVR$\\. Ml I r@OUlatory epplic.ilion$.

M WQUld there*fore be uSf;!ful.

MH will increase cosa.

raorllff)!jl.

harve$ting.

Pro<M!es data suppotting evolution enougti data ha~

my mir'ld foe ha'\\ling YffSel confldenc4!!1 in RPV While irs at.vays usel ut to haY@

Material is irradiat&d would be tim ely materials. rm Enable measure,menl of from the use of corralaliYe (Charpy-been developed material fot 1his study rs embrittleme nt 1han virtually more data. ei;pecially on RPV which will affect alt if they are not swaraof both 1he Charpy ttansition, based) to direct measurement from both 1esa and that there are no (J.JeSlio ns erny other degradation lhat m 1:11erie1s. 1 *feel 1hat o ur models:

as.peel$ of specimen de...,eloped othet RPVs that RPV

• Samples from wtoal y CUf\\oe 8'nC, maste r <:curve (ft acture tougtmess.-based)

SOt"\\'el"llanoe about the Any Information developed we study, 1'he onty,eal already nave a gooo *technlcal pr~ aratlon anc, before 2024 01 are available "for a~ves.sel tra~n tem=rature TO a~roaches M

SrVICimens such M L I reoresentaliveness 01 anv MH shOuld be oenerieally aoolicabl& Ml issue iS makinn sure that M *ML ba.sis.

MH l~i=.

so toeoincide harvestino.

Basic Info Technlcal Criteria Proiect s-- Ifie Purposa / TS ting Criticalness of Technical Importance of Harvested Regulatory Considerations Cost I Complexity Timeliness. of Av11llablllty of Need De.scripUon Plannad Technic al Knowledge Gained Gap Addressed Mal*rial& over Laboratory Aging Al)l)llcabllhy to US Operating Fleet R elated to Inspections and AMPS Score Average Basis for Technic al Priority results m aterials for harvesting METALS Score Comment Score Comment Scor,e Comment Score Comment Score Comment EP RI performing R& D Qn L&boralory replication ~ ry NOE for yo<<j swell<<'lg : MRP diffieull to impossibkl to 227 usM J'.)t'imarily viSual Signifieanea Of void s welling al likely extent of vOO swelling in Fils dais !JiiP fo,r achieve ftuences with last.ig, whidi could <letac.t hig hec flueBCes is uncertain, Very high cost fo r Void swelling, m echanicall PWRs during e:,,:tended o peration and elflended plant representative ii'radiation Applicable to hi9h-fluenoe void swelling once fairly and inspections may detect highly irradiated 1-fil'lh flu8ne& reactor internals roM rtKls. IASCC imaet. on eraeleiM M

oooration MH eondilions MH eotnl'M'lc'IGn\\S n most PINRS MH I9tlnifieant 3.75 onset Of si J'litieant de aradatiOttl VH inttimal:!i TBD Moderete CO$! fo r P'u1pose of wort. would l>e Would greatly increase contaminattld, b ut Fracture toughness data in real Vaida1e to i:wovide real-world c.onfldence i n large set of nol irradiated, Therm~ ly :aged unirradiatl;!d Fractur l;! toughnl;!$$ :and cond~

IQ oompar1;1 to aocelera1,ed aocele,rated agrlg Yalid1;11ion of :acCli!le~ted MO$! :aippicflble to a $Ub$.el of N,o 1$1 method :av,3ilable to acCli!lerated aging daaa with primary $1.,em CASS mlcrosttucrure aoino data MH data H

I aoloo in lab tes.tJno M

PWRs H

measure bss of FT

.... testiM of un lrrad!ated materlal:s M comoonents May be possible. but difficult to replic;a1e long-t*Hgh CO$! for Modet"ate ftuenee (1*2 dpa)

Fractur e toughness and Fracture tougl1r.ess data near Nmit Conftrm regula!CM'y term aging and lrradtation Most a.p~bte to a subset of No ISi meu,oo availa ble 10 W.oold lnctease confidence.,

ltradlated CASS microstruclure re~irina further evaluation ML 06itio n MH

affect, M

PWR, H

measure b ss of FT 3.5 reQu1ator;, nncinnn H

comoonoots Moderate cost for Deter'mine whe~her sec miUgation Pu rpose of this woitt is to contaminaltld, b ul methods are effective al p re-venting Vaida1e NDE and P'u!pOse of wort would be a:ssess inspection and nol irradiated, Metallic comJ):)nen1s with NDE Sfld destructive sec; effectiveness of NOE at nitigation melhod to provide,eaJ.wodd mitigation method Increase confidence in NDE primar;,stsem known flaws examination d~ectlon and slzlno MH effeciivenes.s MH Yalidatlon of lab tes11nQ H

Applicable to ah plants M L effectiveness 3.75 and m ltJQatl<m methods M

components Moderate cost for contamin.i1ed, bu1 Purpose of~

would t>e F;:itlgve calOJla1Ions Inform not lmlldklted, Metallic oomponenl s with NDE end destructiYe Determine whether fatigue flaws are Veida1e fatigue ife to i:wovide real-world sampling inspections of Increase oonfidence i n fatigue primarystsem limitino farioue life examination resen1 in hioh usaoe localions MH methcxtolooies ML Yalida1ion of lab testino H

Aoolicable to all olants M L limi1ino faticJue locali<lns 3.2S life c alc:tAarions M

comoonoots

Baslc:lnfo Technlc..al Crlte,ta Pro]ect Specific Purpos* I THtil'lg Cr-lticalnu.s of Technical lmportsnce of Hlarvested Rogulatoiy Considerations C-o&t I Complox.ily Timolinossof Availa'bllity of Nee-d 0escrlptlon Planned Technlcal Knowledge Gained Gap Addressed Materials over L;i,bo,atol'")'

Ap pllcablllt:y to US Operating Fleet Related to Inspections arad AMPs Score Average BHls for Priority results materials for A ina hal"Ytistina ELECTRICAL Sc ore Comment Score Comment Score Comment Score Commerat Score Comment Low and m edium voltage

cable, Cables pcOlected with fire retardant coating 1 E MOVs from harsh and mild ooWooments 1 E Air oe,erated \\lalves: 4160 1 E txeakers 1 E Moldod case br.eakers 480V, 250V DC, 125 VOC, 1 E Rela~ from mild environment GE - HFA.

Agastal tlmlng relays, any from Weslinghollse. Potier Brumfield. Stuthers Dunn etc.,

Ba1terie1-

~"'euat;on*

rch interest enclosures OlstribuUoo: swltch9ear, MCCs, LCs I Contt,ol:

Horseshoe, SSCP, ASP, etc.

Baslc:lnfo Technlc..al Crlte,ta Pro]ect Specific Purpos* I THtil'lg Cr-lticalnu.s of Technical lmportsnce of Hlarvested Rogulatoiy Considerations C-o&t I Complox.ily Timolinossof Availa'bllity of Nee-d 0escrlptlon Planned Technlcal Knowledge Gained Gap Addressed Materials over L;i,bo,atol'")'

Ap pllcablllt:y to US Operating Fleet Related to Inspections arad AMPs Score Average BHls for Priority results materials for A ina hal"Ytistina CONCRET E Sc ore Comment Score Comment Score Comment Score Commerat Score Comment StruClures e:icposed to high radialion Posl-tensi'ioned s1J1Jctures Corrosion or reinPOl'Cing steeil.

t~ don. 1.-ier. embCJdment Spenl ruel pool and transfet canal-boric add arrad:: on Concrete in f>'INRs Alkali Ag!)l'egate Reaction Large slructural sections for tesling

Criteria Title Crilicalness of Technical Gap Addressed Importance of Harvested Materials over Laboratory Aging Applicabili1y to US Operating Fleet Regulatory Considerations Rela1ed to Inspections and AMPs Harvesting cost and complexity Timeliness of results Availability of materials for harvesting Description Harvesting to address critical gaps should be priori1ized over less essential technical gaps Key considerations are the ease of laboratory replication of aging mechanism and unique field aspccls oflhe aging mechanism.

Degradalion mechanisms that are harder to replicate with simulated aging condi1ions would be of higher priority for harvesting. For example, simultaneous thermal and irradiation conditions are difficult to replicate oulside of the plant environment. Ahematively, accelerated aging may not be feasible for a mechanism sensitive to dose rate. These two degradation mechanisms may be best evaluated

µsing !mves1ed materials. for unique field aspects, legacy n1a1erials (e.g., fabrication me thods, 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 wi1h representative properties.

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 planls.

If mature inspection me1hods exist and are easy to apply to monilor degradation, harvesting may be less valuable. If inspection methods do not exist, harvesting may be essential to ensure confidence in the assessment ofage*related degradation in that particular component.The less confidence that NRC staff has in the 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 signficance /

sufficient data available for regulatory decisions L = Low risk significance/ large amount of data available H = Nearly impossible to replicate service enviroment / critically important to use harvested materials MH = Challenging to replicate service enviroment / important to use harvested materials M = Possible with some limitations to replicate service enviroment / moderately import.int to !l'>e harve,;tel;l material,;

ML= Not challenging to replicate service enviroment / less Important to use harvested materials L = Very easy to replicate service enviroment / not important to use harvested materials H = All plants MH=AII PWRs M = All BWRs or most PWRs ML= ~10-15 plants L = <5 plants H = No or very limited inspection methods available/ low confidence in AMPs MH = Limited inspection methods available/ low-to-moderate confidence in AMPs M = Some inspection methods available/

moderate confidence in AMPs effectiveness of the relevant AMP, the higher priority for harves1ing. ML= Good inspection methods available

/ medium-high confidence in AMPs Acrivilies with higher costs and complexity are less auracrive than similar activities with lower costs and that are simpler to execute..

For example. harvesting unirradiated concrete or electrical cables is less expensive and le-ss complex than harvesting from the RPV internals or the RPY.

The ability of a po1ential harvesting program to provide timely results to sup11ort either a tech nical 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.

L = Effective, well-accepted inspection methods exist/ high confidence In AMPs H = Highly irradiated (>5 dpa)

MH = Lightly irradiated/ contaminated M = Minimal contamination or high effort unlrradiated ML= Unirradiated, moderate effort expected L = Unirradiated, low effort expected H = High MH = Medium-high M = Medium ML= Medium-low L=Low

Ne.c:!Oucriptio,n RPV RPV - Hlgfl fluMce & l'llgh s~ wsse, with w,ell-c;l;,bll$1\\ed unirr.,d~1od pr,openle!I M o.illllro -.ic,nto, kltlghne>>.

& diem;~

iH&flll'letiOtl ol lhrough-thk:knessl)06itioo

&labia meo:sr.m;,meril Clf bo1h RFV

• S,mplci fr'Qffl vil"IU/llly 11'11:t Ch:wpy l r;wi$itir;ln <;LWVCI any ve11&el aoo ma51er cuf'le lramilUOn teffll(llraliqTO Th!Qugh thil;kncn $0!.lion to va!idat4!- Muetioe & at1er.ia~on Pr-o,iidi:$ dab $1.1PPQr1ing ~olution rrom ll'le uie o, com~talive (Cl'la1py-b85&C1} to <lifflct mea1,Uf~t (fracture loU{tlne-ss-based) appr0t1d'l&6 Critit.SIIMH Of Te.cll.nieal lmportanre Of Hlll'YHle-d G;11p Addru**d M;ateri;i,1$ -er Labor.ltory Aging Score Comment Score ComMent MH MH ltlebettHne.

C~g11:toH beyondlllebel~lne MH Again cr:r:.:~

ootslde MH MH

1. NIA embri1tlemert la not ir1$pei;lodJor cmbrit11eimcit i; not lospeciedior Cost I Comple11.ity MH Pt ojectSpe,cif"te Tlmellnu, of Nl$Ultl Al~a~on r.:irmula ha!i ~n,,dell 101 yean. ln!!.ldei the beltline, il'a accepted aoo bellYed ooose,n,atlve. aoo this IS probabtf true.

Gr~_,.- imp.M;t a,~tod l'loith t.iirvc,~ da1;, ovt$idc of bel!Jloe.

Very Rmilled ex-pla,ic dlK8 ex~ts WOl'tll'ride (pefflap,s 6 plaflt'S) lo comp.n to 5~

ence ~ T~ (lau, ch.It 00 Q}lisl coml)r,Jre r~$0f'lllbly wc,1, &!or ha~ cxpl/lin:sblo f0i1$01'1$ for dlsagraem&nl. We nave *n1e pflyslcal reasoo to e,;pect di~C,$ botwecn, cx,pt;m1 jh ;i,n,~lod) tiat;l ;,nd $ll,VCIINlflot dalil..* oot (115 ll01ed)'IY9 have oot dlec+;ed In llletmanycaat'6.

Avall.;1b,llltyof ffi-ilt1ri&l1for tlar'lle6tln

Basic Info Te-chnlcal C riteria Pro le ct s~clflc Purpose I r.sung CritiealneH o f Technic;al lmportan.ce of Hal"Vested Regula,tory Con.sideration s Cost I Complexity Tirmelinus of Avallablt!ty of Neet.1 Descrip tion Plannod Technical Kn owledge Gained Gap Add reHed Matcni als ove r Labofa-tory Aging Applicablltty to US Operating F leet R elated to-In spec ti ens and A MPs Score Ave-.rage Basis for Technical Prl01fty results mat erials f or ha rvesting META LS Score Comm ent Soon, Comm ent Score Com m,ent Score Comment Score Comment EPRI performing R&O oo Labor.atory replieation vaty NOE '°' void SW811ing ;

difficull to impossible 10 MRP-227 u:.ses primairily Significance of void swelling at Likely extent of void swelling in Fills data gap for achieve lluences with visu;;1I testing, which could

~her fluences is uncienain, Very hig h cost for Vold swelling, mech9nlcal PWRs during e11,1en<Jed opetatlon and eJ(teoded plan(

represe,nta1lve lrradiatloo Apptlcable to hlgh-fluenoe detect ~oid.swelllng o nce and Inspectio ns ma~ detect hlghly lrTa<lated H IOO fluooce reactor Internals rvt'IN!lr1i&s.. IASC.C impact on r.r.vt.inn M

loo8f'ation MH conditiOm-MH comPOl'ents in most PWRs MH lairtv s~nffica.nt 3.75 ooget o, Sianilicanl <l~radaliOn VH internal$

TBD Moderate cost for Pu, ~

ol WO~ WO\\ld ~

Wo uld greatly increase contaminated. but Fracture toughness data i n real Validat e to pl"O'Vide real-world confidence in large se*t of not irrad ialed.

Thermally aged unirracliated Fr$C1Ure toughness and conditions to com pare 10 ;aocelerated aocelerated ~ irlQ validation of oocelE!(ated Most applteable t o a subset of No 1$ 1 method aw ilatile 10

~

lerated ~ ing <late v.ith primary stsem CASS mlcrostlucture j!Q!nodat9 MH data H

aoino in lat> 1es,loa M

PWRs H

measure loss of FT 4.25 tes1Jna of unitradlate<I materials M componients M ay be possible, bUI dlfficull to repllcale long-Hlgticosl fCM' M od9fate nuence (1-2 dpa)

Fracture toughness and Fracture looghneM data riear limit Confirm regulatOf'Y' term aging and irradiation Most applteable to a subset of No ISi mechod availatile lo Would increase coolidence in irradiated CASS microstructure reauiriff'KI h.Jrther evallation ML I oasition MH effect,;

M PWRs H

measure Joss of FT 3.5 reaulal""'...,..silion H

com...,....,nts Moderate cost for oe1e1mine whether SCC m iligaUOn Purpose of this~ is to contaminated, but methods are effective at prevenmg Validale NDE and Purpose of wort< WOl,jd 00 as.sess inspection an<l not irrad ia1ed, Me1all!c oomponenl.s w.th NOE and destrud lve SOC; effedl~ene$S of NOE al mi~gat Ion method to prO"lkle real--wor1d mitigation method Increase confidence In NOE

!)Omary stsem k nown ftaws e.xamin.ation oetecti on and si.:zina MH effecth,.eness MH valil.1ation of lab teslina H

Aoolicable to all Diani$

ML elklctiveness 3.75 and mitioation methods M

com...........,nts Moderate <<1st for contaminated, but Putpo,se Of WO~ WO\\ld 00 Faligue cateulations infOl'm not in'ad ialed.

Metallic component s with NDE and destructive Determine whether fatigue flaws ar,e Validaie fatigue life to provide real-world sampling in:spections of Increase confidence in fatigue primary sts.em limitino fa1ioue life examination oresent Fl hiah usaae locations MH methodolooies ML valida*tion of lal> testina H

Aoollcable to all n lants ML limitino faricme locations 3.25 Wfe CfllcUl<'ltions M

com........,,n1s

Basic Info Technlcal Crtterta P-rolect Specific Purpose I Testing CrltiealnHs of Technieal Importance of H:arvested Rogu latory Considorat iOns Cosl I Comp~xity Tlmetiriou of Availability of Need Descrip tion Planned Technical !Knowledge Gained Gap Addressed Miiterfal!s oYer Ll!lboratory Appllciiblllty to US Operiitlngi Fleet IRelat&d to Inspections and AMPs Score A'Yera9f:

8Hls for Pr-lorlty res.ults materfels for Aaina harvH l ina ELECTRICAL Score Comment Score Comment Score Comment Score Commenl Scol"e Com ment Low and m edium YOH.age cables Caoles pwcected Yloith fire retardant coating 1 E MOV!. from harsh and mitd enWonmems 1 E Air operated valves; 4160 1 E britakllfS 1 E Molded case breakers 4f,OV, 250V DC, 125VOC, 1 E Relays from rrild envi'onment GE - HFA, Agastal timing relays, any from Westinghouse, Potter Brumfield. Stultlers Dunn etc.,

Ballet"ies

~ l~I p~~1r1;1ti1;;mJ Fire research Interest Eloctrical.ondosures Dis.tributioo: switch~ear, MCCs. LCs I Control:

Horseshoe. SSCP. ASP, etc,

Basic Info Technlcal Crtterta P-rolect Specific Purpose I Testing CrltiealnHs of Technieal Importance of H:arvested Rogu latory Considorat iOns Cosl I Comp~xity Tlmetiriou of Availability of Need Description Planned Technical !Knowledge Gained Gap Addressed Miiterfal!s oYer Ll!lboratory Appllciiblllty to US Operiitlngi Fleet IRelat&d to Inspections and AMPs Score A'Yera9f:

8Hls for Pr-lorlty res.ults materfels for Aaina harvH l ina CONCRET E Score Comment Score Comment Score Comment Score Commenl Scol"e Com ment Structures exposed to high radialion Posl-tensf:oned structUfes Corrosion of reinfCNfdng stee,1, tendon, liner, embedment Spenl fuel pool and transfer canal-boric acid atlack on concrete iri P'VVRs Alkali Agg:regate Reaction Large s11ucturl'!I seciJons for testing

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Attachments:

Matt -

Kirk, Mark Mon, 10 Sep 2018 13:27:39 +0000 Hiser, Matthew Gordon, Matthew;Tregoning, Robert;Raynaud, Patrick Re: Harvesting prioritization for RPV

~N~o~te-t~o-r-eq_u_e-st~e-r:- A~t~ta-c~h-m-e-nt~i~s~

Harvesting Needs Prioritization 8-31-18 [+MTK].xlsx immediately following.

See attached. I added some explanations for my ranking, although they may be somewhat cryptic.

Let me know if you need more explanation.

mark From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, September 10, 2018 8:40 AM To; Kirk, Mark

Subject:

RE: Harvesting prioritization for RPV Thanks Mark!

From: Kirk, Mark Sent: Monday, September 10, 2018 8:36 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>; Gordon, Matthew <Matthew.Gordon@nrc.gov>;

Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Cc: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Re: Harvesting prioritization for RPV Matt -

Thanks for the reminder. This fell off of my radar. I will reply later today.

mark From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, September 10, 2018 7:27 AM To: Kirk, Mark; Gordon, Matthew; Tregoning, Robert Cc: Purtscher, Patrick; Audrain, Margaret

Subject:

RE: Harvesting prioritization for RPV Hi guys,

I just wanted to follow up on this earlier email to see if you have had the opportunity to take a look at this. Ideally we'd like to have something to compile with the other areas by the end of this week.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 30 l-415-24541 Office: TWFN I OD62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, August 31, 2018 9:36 AM To: Kirk, Mark <Mark.Kirk@nrc.gov>; Gordon, Matthew <Matthew.Gordon@nrc.gov>;

Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Cc: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret

<Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting prioritization for RPV I should also say, please feel free to add or subtract from the rows (ie propose new or eliminate from consideration certain RPV harvesting needs) and to provide feedback (edits, comments, etc.) on the criteria and the guidance to use the criteria.

Thanks!

Matt From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, August 31, 2018 9:33 AM To: Kirk, Mark <Mark.Kirk@nrc.gov>; Gordon, Matthew <Matthew.Gordon@nrc.gov>;

Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Cc: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret

<Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting prioritization for RPV Hi Mark, Matt, and Rob, We would like to request your input as the RPV technical experts on the prioritization of harvesting opportunities for RPV materials. I have attached a template of the prioritization of harvesting needs in the non-RPV metals area. Can you follow that template (check the scoring guidance on the first sheet) to provide input for the RPV technical area?

Ideally, it would be good if we could receive your input in the next two weeks by September 14. We're hoping to pull all of the input from the different areas into a broader harvesting draft deliverable to share with NRR for feedback by October.

Please me know if you have any questions.

Thanks!

Matt 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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

Criteria Title Crilicalness of Technical Gap Addressed Importance of Harvested Materials over Laboratory Aging Applicabili1y to US Operating Fleet Regulatory Considerations Rela1ed to Inspections and AMPs Harvesting cost and complexity Timeliness of results Availability of materials for harvesting Description Harvesting to address critical gaps should be priori1ized over less essential technical gaps Key considerations are the ease of laboratory replication of aging mechanism and unique field aspccls oflhe aging mechanism.

Degradalion mechanisms that are harder to replicate with simulated aging condi1ions would be of higher priority for harvesting. For example, simultaneous thermal and irradiation conditions are difficult to replicate oulside of the plant environment. Ahematively, accelerated aging may not be feasible for a mechanism sensitive to dose rate. These two degradation mechanisms may be best evaluated

µsing !mves1ed materials. for unique field aspects, legacy n1a1erials (e.g., fabrication me thods, 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 wi1h representative properties.

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 planls.

If mature inspection me1hods exist and are easy to apply to monilor degradation, harvesting may be less valuable. If inspection methods do not exist, harvesting may be essential to ensure confidence in the assessment ofage*related degradation in that particular component.The less confidence that NRC staff has in the 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 signficance /

sufficient data available for regulatory decisions L = Low risk significance/ large amount of data available H = Nearly impossible to replicate service enviroment / critically important to use harvested materials MH = Challenging to replicate service enviroment / important to use harvested materials M = Possible with some limitations to replicate service enviroment / moderately import.int to !l'>e harve,;tel;l material,;

ML= Not challenging to replicate service enviroment / less Important to use harvested materials L = Very easy to replicate service enviroment / not important to use harvested materials H = All plants MH=AII PWRs M = All BWRs or most PWRs ML= ~10-15 plants L = <5 plants H = No or very limited inspection methods available/ low confidence in AMPs MH = Limited inspection methods available/ low-to-moderate confidence in AMPs M = Some inspection methods available/

moderate confidence in AMPs effectiveness of the relevant AMP, the higher priority for harves1ing. ML= Good inspection methods available

/ medium-high confidence in AMPs Acrivilies with higher costs and complexity are less auracrive than similar activities with lower costs and that are simpler to execute..

For example. harvesting unirradiated concrete or electrical cables is less expensive and le-ss complex than harvesting from the RPV internals or the RPY.

The ability of a po1ential harvesting program to provide timely results to sup11ort either a tech nical 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.

L = Effective, well-accepted inspection methods exist/ high confidence In AMPs H = Highly irradiated (>5 dpa)

MH = Lightly irradiated/ contaminated M = Minimal contamination or high effort unlrradiated ML= Unirradiated, moderate effort expected L = Unirradiated, low effort expected H = High MH = Medium-high M = Medium ML= Medium-low L=Low

Ne.c:!Oucriptio,n RPV RPV - Hlgfl fluMce & l'llgh s~ wsse, with w,ell-c;l;,bll$1\\ed unirr.,d~1od pr,openle!I M o.illllro -.ic,nto, kltlghne>>.

& diem;~

iH&flll'letiOtl ol lhrough-thk:knessl)06itioo

&labia meo:sr.m;,meril Clf bo1h RFV

• S,mplci fr'Qffl vil"IU/llly 11'11:t Ch:wpy l r;wi$itir;ln <;LWVCI any ve11&el aoo ma51er cuf'le lramilUOn teffll(llraliqTO Th!Qugh thil;kncn $0!.lion to va!idat4!- Muetioe & at1er.ia~on Pr-o,iidi:$ dab $1.1PPQr1ing ~olution rrom ll'le uie o, com~talive (Cl'la1py-b85&C1} to <lifflct mea1,Uf~t (fracture loU{tlne-ss-based) appr0t1d'l&6 Critit.SIIMH Of Te.cll.nieal lmportanre Of Hlll'YHle-d G;11p Addru**d M;ateri;i,1$ -er Labor.ltory Aging Score Comment Score ComMent MH MH ltlebettHne.

C~g11:toH beyondlllebel~lne MH Again cr:r:.:~

ootslde MH MH

1. NIA embri1tlemert la not ir1$pei;lodJor cmbrit11eimcit i; not lospeciedior Cost I Comple11.ity MH Pt ojectSpe,cif"te Tlmellnu, of Nl$Ultl Al~a~on r.:irmula ha!i ~n,,dell 101 yean. ln!!.ldei the beltline, il'a accepted aoo bellYed ooose,n,atlve. aoo this IS probabtf true.

Gr~_,.- imp.M;t a,~tod l'loith t.iirvc,~ da1;, ovt$idc of bel!Jloe.

Very Rmilled ex-pla,ic dlK8 ex~ts WOl'tll'ride (pefflap,s 6 plaflt'S) lo comp.n to 5~

ence ~ T~ (lau, ch.It 00 Q}lisl coml)r,Jre r~$0f'lllbly wc,1, &!or ha~ cxpl/lin:sblo f0i1$01'1$ for dlsagraem&nl. We nave *n1e pflyslcal reasoo to e,;pect di~C,$ botwecn, cx,pt;m1 jh ;i,n,~lod) tiat;l ;,nd $ll,VCIINlflot dalil..* oot (115 ll01ed)'IY9 have oot dlec+;ed In llletmanycaat'6.

Avall.;1b,llltyof ffi-ilt1ri&l1for tlar'lle6tln

Basic Info Te-chnlcal C riteria Pro le ct s~clflc Purpose I r.sung CritiealneH o f Technic;al lmportan.ce of Hal"Vested Regula,tory Con.sideration s Cost I Complexity Tirmelinus of Avallablt!ty of Neet.1 Descrip tion Plannod Technical Kn owledge Gained Gap Add reHed Matcni als ove r Labofa-tory Aging Applicablltty to US Operating F leet R elated to-In spec ti ens and A MPs Score Ave-.rage Basis for Technical Prl01fty results mat erials f or ha rvesting META LS Score Comm ent Soon, Comm ent Score Com m,ent Score Comment Score Comment EPRI performing R&O oo Labor.atory replieation vaty NOE '°' void SW811ing ;

difficull to impossible 10 MRP-227 u:.ses primairily Significance of void swelling at Likely extent of void swelling in Fills data gap for achieve lluences with visu;;1I testing, which could

~her fluences is uncienain, Very hig h cost for Vold swelling, mech9nlcal PWRs during e11,1en<Jed opetatlon and eJ(teoded plan(

represe,nta1lve lrradiatloo Apptlcable to hlgh-fluenoe detect ~oid.swelllng o nce and Inspectio ns ma~ detect hlghly lrTa<lated H IOO fluooce reactor Internals rvt'IN!lr1i&s.. IASC.C impact on r.r.vt.inn M

loo8f'ation MH conditiOm-MH comPOl'ents in most PWRs MH lairtv s~nffica.nt 3.75 ooget o, Sianilicanl <l~radaliOn VH internal$

TBD Moderate cost for Pu, ~

ol WO~ WO\\ld ~

Wo uld greatly increase contaminated. but Fracture toughness data i n real Validat e to pl"O'Vide real-world confidence in large se*t of not irrad ialed.

Thermally aged unirracliated Fr$C1Ure toughness and conditions to com pare 10 ;aocelerated aocelerated ~ irlQ validation of oocelE!(ated Most applteable t o a subset of No 1$ 1 method aw ilatile 10

~

lerated ~ ing <late v.ith primary stsem CASS mlcrostlucture j!Q!nodat9 MH data H

aoino in lat> 1es,loa M

PWRs H

measure loss of FT 4.25 tes1Jna of unitradlate<I materials M componients M ay be possible, bUI dlfficull to repllcale long-Hlgticosl fCM' M od9fate nuence (1-2 dpa)

Fracture toughness and Fracture looghneM data riear limit Confirm regulatOf'Y' term aging and irradiation Most applteable to a subset of No ISi mechod availatile lo Would increase coolidence in irradiated CASS microstructure reauiriff'KI h.Jrther evallation ML I oasition MH effect,;

M PWRs H

measure Joss of FT 3.5 reaulal""'...,..silion H

com...,....,nts Moderate cost for oe1e1mine whether SCC m iligaUOn Purpose of this~ is to contaminated, but methods are effective at prevenmg Validale NDE and Purpose of wort< WOl,jd 00 as.sess inspection an<l not irrad ia1ed, Me1all!c oomponenl.s w.th NOE and destrud lve SOC; effedl~ene$S of NOE al mi~gat Ion method to prO"lkle real--wor1d mitigation method Increase confidence In NOE

!)Omary stsem k nown ftaws e.xamin.ation oetecti on and si.:zina MH effecth,.eness MH valil.1ation of lab teslina H

Aoolicable to all Diani$

ML elklctiveness 3.75 and mitioation methods M

com...........,nts Moderate <<1st for contaminated, but Putpo,se Of WO~ WO\\ld 00 Faligue cateulations infOl'm not in'ad ialed.

Metallic component s with NDE and destructive Determine whether fatigue flaws ar,e Validaie fatigue life to provide real-world sampling in:spections of Increase confidence in fatigue primary sts.em limitino fa1ioue life examination oresent Fl hiah usaae locations MH methodolooies ML valida*tion of lal> testina H

Aoollcable to all n lants ML limitino faricme locations 3.25 Wfe CfllcUl<'ltions M

com........,,n1s

Basic Info Technlcal Crtterta P-rolect Specific Purpose I Testing CrltiealnHs of Technieal Importance of H:arvested Rogu latory Considorat iOns Cosl I Comp~xity Tlmetiriou of Availability of Need Descrip tion Planned Technical !Knowledge Gained Gap Addressed Miiterfal!s oYer Ll!lboratory Appllciiblllty to US Operiitlngi Fleet IRelat&d to Inspections and AMPs Score A'Yera9f:

8Hls for Pr-lorlty res.ults materfels for Aaina harvH l ina ELECTRICAL Score Comment Score Comment Score Comment Score Commenl Scol"e Com ment Low and m edium YOH.age cables Caoles pwcected Yloith fire retardant coating 1 E MOV!. from harsh and mitd enWonmems 1 E Air operated valves; 4160 1 E britakllfS 1 E Molded case breakers 4f,OV, 250V DC, 125VOC, 1 E Relays from rrild envi'onment GE - HFA, Agastal timing relays, any from Westinghouse, Potter Brumfield. Stultlers Dunn etc.,

Ballet"ies

~ l~I p~~1r1;1ti1;;mJ Fire research Interest Eloctrical.ondosures Dis.tributioo: switch~ear, MCCs. LCs I Control:

Horseshoe. SSCP. ASP, etc,

Basic Info Technlcal Crtterta P-rolect Specific Purpose I Testing CrltiealnHs of Technieal Importance of H:arvested Rogu latory Considorat iOns Cosl I Comp~xity Tlmetiriou of Availability of Need Description Planned Technical !Knowledge Gained Gap Addressed Miiterfal!s oYer Ll!lboratory Appllciiblllty to US Operiitlngi Fleet IRelat&d to Inspections and AMPs Score A'Yera9f:

8Hls for Pr-lorlty res.ults materfels for Aaina harvH l ina CONCRET E Score Comment Score Comment Score Comment Score Commenl Scol"e Com ment Structures exposed to high radialion Posl-tensf:oned structUfes Corrosion of reinfCNfdng stee,1, tendon, liner, embedment Spenl fuel pool and transfer canal-boric acid atlack on concrete iri P'VVRs Alkali Agg:regate Reaction Large s11ucturl'!I seciJons for testing

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hi Kenn, Hiser, Matthew Fri, 14 Sep 2018 12:08:29 +0000 Miller, Kenneth A RE: Harvesting Prioritization Status I just wanted to check back in on this harvesting prioritization table and see how it's going. I'll be out much of next week for a trip to ORNL, but may try to schedule a meeting with you the following week if that would be helpful.

Thanks!

Matt PS No pressure, but Mita did get me the concrete input yesterday;)

From: Miller, Kenneth A Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 7:56 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Prioritization Status Thanks for the reply Matt. 1.... rx_6) _______________

____.~

I can call in Friday for sure... calendar is open (9a-2p ).

Thanks for your understanding.

Kenneth A. Miller, Senior Electrical Engineer (Electrical Team Leader)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission RES/DE/Instrumentation, Controls & Electrical Engineering Branch, T-10E02 Mail Stop: T-10A36 Washington, DC 20555 (301) 415-2127 Cell:,...1-----.IFax: (301) 415-6671 kenn.miller@nrc.gov From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 7:35 AM To: Miller, Kenneth A <KennethA.Miller@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Prioritization Status

Sounds good Kenn! Have a good trip to Philly! If it's alright, I'll throw a scheduler for you and Mita for next week...

Thanks!

Matt 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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Miller, Kenneth A Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 7:34 AM To: Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

Declined: Harvesting Prioritization Status When: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 9:00 AM-9:30 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Hi Matt, I have a full plate today. I don't have anything to report.

I am leaving this evening for HEAF testing for the next week near Philadelphia but am taking harvesting matrix with me to work on in the evenings.

Can I bow out of this meeting today? I will email you an update next Monday evening if that is ok.

Thanks, Kenn Miller

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hiser, Matthew Tue, 4 Sep 2018 12:11:55 +0000 Miller, Kenneth A RE: Harvesting Prioritization Status Looking at my calendar now, we can play it by ear. I'll try to check in via email probably, because I'll be I

!and then on travel most of the following week...

Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer (b)(6}

US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-24541 Office.* TWFN 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Miller, Kenneth A Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 7:56 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Prioritization Status Thanks for the reply Matt. 1... rx_

6 i _______________

I can call in Friday for sure... calendar is open (9a-2p ).

Thanks for your understanding.

Kenneth A. Miller, Senior Electrical Engineer (Electrical Team Leader)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission RES/DE/Instrumentation, Controls & Electrical Engineering Branch, T-10E02 Mail Stop: T-10A36 Washington, DC 2055,..5 ____

(301) 415-2127 Cell: I I Fax: (301) 415-6671 kenn.miller@nrc.gov (b)(6) __

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 7:35 AM To; Miller, Kenneth A <KennethA.Miller@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Prioritization Status

Sounds good Kenn! Have a good trip to Philly! If it's alright, I'll throw a scheduler for you and Mita for next week...

Thanks!

Matt 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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Miller, Kenneth A Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 7:34 AM To: Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

Declined: Harvesting Prioritization Status When: Tuesday, September 04, 2018 9:00 AM-9:30 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Hi Matt, I have a full plate today. I don't have anything to report.

I am leaving this evening for HEAF testing for the next week near Philadelphia but am taking harvesting matrix with me to work on in the evenings.

Can I bow out of this meeting today? I will email you an update next Monday evening if that is ok.

Thanks, Kenn Miller

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hi Pat, Hiser, Matthew Wed, 22 Nov 201712:21:23 +0000 Purtsclher, Patrick RE: harvesting report Sorry for the very delayed response, but I took a look at the harvesting report and don't have any major concerns. I think it's ready to go to Steve...

Thanks!

Matt

---

Original Message-----

F rom: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Tuesday, October 3 I, 2017 l :52 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy

<Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

harvesting report Draft from Pradeep on harvesting.

Pat

---

Original Message-----

From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 1 :49 PM To: 'Ramuhalli, Pradeep' <Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov>

Subject:

RE: You have files ready for pickup Thanks, 1 got the file.

My idea to finish everything now is for us (Amy, Matt, Rob, Meg, and myself) to read through it one more time and then send it to my branch chief for his information. Then you can get a PNNL lab report # and complete phase I of the project.

Pat

---

Original Message-----

From: Ramuhalli, Pradeep [3]

Sent:Tuesday,October31, 201710:41 AM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

[Extemal_Sender] You have files ready for pickup

Hello, Ramuhalli, Pradeep (Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov) has sent you the following I file(s:)

Subject:

TLR - resending draft Comments: Patrick, (b)(6)

The TLR update should be available via the link below. Just saw your email from last week~

land then playing catchup). Resending this via FTP instead of email attachment.

Pradeep The following files have been uploaded to the MassTransit Web File Transfer Services. You can download them by going to:

I (b)(4)1 and selecting the file(s) and chckmg Download (All/Selected).

NOTE: This link and contained passkey are only good for 14 days.

Harvesting-TLR-DRAFT.docx (5.07M bytes)

This message was automatically generated from the PNNL FX Web File Transfer Service. If you have questions about its validity, please contact the sender listed above.

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Purtscher, Patrick Thu, 20 Jul 2017 15:02:28 -0400 Hiser, Matthew RE: harvesting report No answer, I left a voice message.

Pat From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2017 7:08 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: harvesting report From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Friday, June 30, 2017 10:13 AM To: Ramuhalli, Pradeep (Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov) <Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov>

Subject:

harvesting report Good morning, I was just checking to see where you are with finalizing the harvesting report? I know you are almost finished, but I don't want to see this get delayed.

Thanks, Pat

From:

Audrain, Margaret Sent:

Wed, 1 Nov 2017 12:13:33 -0400 To:

Subject:

Purtsclher, Patrick;Hiser, Matthew;Hul I, Amy;Tregoning, Robert RE: harvesting report

Pat, 1 think it looks good and have no comments.

Meg

---

Original Message-----

From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 1:52 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audtain@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy

<Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

harvesting report Draft from Pradeep on harvesting.

Pat

---

Original Message-----

From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 20 I 7 1:49 PM To: 'Ramuhalli, Pradeep' <Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov>

Subject:

RE: You have files ready for pickup Thanks, I got the file.

My idea to finish everything now is for us (Amy, Matt, Rob, Meg, and myself) to read through it one more time and then send it to my branch chief for his information. Then you can get a PNNL lab report # and complete phase l of the project.

Pat

---

Original Message-----

From: Ramuhalli, Pradeep [4]

Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2017 10:41 AM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

[Extemal_Sender) You have files ready for pickup

Hello, Ramuhalli, Pradeep (Pradeep.Ramuhalli@pnnl.gov) has sent you the following I file(s:)

Subject:

TLR - resending draft Comments: Patrick, (b )(6)

The TLR update should be available via the link below. Just saw your email from last week q._ ___ __,land then playing catchup). Resending this via FTP instead of email attachment.

Pradeep

The following files have been uploaded to the MassTransit Web File Transfer Services. You can download them by going to:

and selecting the file(s) and clicking Download (All/Selected).

NOTE: This link and contained passkey are only good for 14 days.

Harvesting-TLR-DRAFT.docx (5.07M bytes)

This message was automatically generated from the PNNL FX Web File Transfer Service. If you have questions about its validity, please contact the sender listed above.

From:

Audrain, Margaret Sent:

Wed, 30 May 2018 14:10:46 +0000 To:

Subject:

Pat, Tregoning, Robert;Purtscher, Patrick;Hiser, Matthew RE: harvesting report I'm working on putting together my site visit to PNNL in July. Do you think it'd be easiest to have Steve Bruemmer coordinate with Pradeep on timing/etc? Does Pradeep have the latest version of the spreadsheet to work with in advance of my coming there?

Thanks, Meg From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2018 7:38 AM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>;

Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: harvesting report Pat:

Thanks, they have the slides and summary and we indicated during the meeting last week that the final report is largely consistent with that information. They obviously want the final report however because it will provide much more context and detail and also reflect at least some level of NRC review....

Rob 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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2018 7:34 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>;

Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Cc: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: harvesting report

All, I will contact Pradeep today to see how the revision is coming. In fact, the slides and summary of the workshop (already available to EPRI) would be more valuable to industry than the report itself; these files include slides from Pradeep that reflect the report.

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

Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@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 <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.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/1::.PRI 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 Technical Advisor for Materials 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:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Matt:

Tregoning, Robert Wed, 18 Jan 2017 15:02:50 -0500 Hiser, Matthew;Purtscher, Patrick RE: Harvesting service irradiated material from NPPs When we put together our high-priority needs for harvesting, we should have an internal meeting including Mita, Tom Koshy, and Darrell Murdock, at a minimum. They can add items related to concrete, l&C, and electrical. While we don't need to be comprehensive at this point, it would be good to have some examples.....

Cheers, Rob 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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 201711:53 AM To: Sircar, Madhumita <Madhumita.Sircar@nrc.gov>

Cc: Tregoning, Robert <Robert. Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting service irradiated material from NPPs Hi Mita, Yes, we're planning for March 7 and 8 in 3WFN. I've attached the meeting announcement and a draft agenda.

Thanks!

Matt From: Sircar, Madhumita Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 201711:51 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Cc: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting service irradiated material from NPPs

Matt,

Rob Tregoning suggested me to contact you regarding the meeting on harvesting service irradiated material from NPPs. Is the meeting in March?

Thanks, Mita Sircar Tel: 301-415-1804

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Hiser, Matthew Wed, 18 Jan 2017 16:52:45 +0000 Sircar, Madhumita Tregoning, Robert Note to requester: Attachments are immediately following.

Subject:

RE: Harvesting service irradiated material from NPPs Attachments:

Condensed Workshop Agenda.docx, Harvesting Workshop Announcement.docx Hi Mita, Yes, we're planning for March 7 and 8 in 3WFN. I've attached the meeting announcement and a draft agenda.

Thanks!

Matt From: Sircar, Madhumita Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 201711:51 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Cc: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting service irradiated material from NPPs

Matt, Rob Tregoning suggested me to contact you regarding the meeting on harvesting service irradiated material from NPPs. Is the meeting in March?

Thanks, Mita Sircar Tel: 301-415-1804

Draft Agenda - March 7-8, 2017 Harvesting Workshop Tuesday, March 7, 2017 Introduction Overview of workshop purpose and objectives Session 1: Motivation for Harvesting Solicited presentations from EPRI, DOE, NRC, and international organizations followed by panel discussion Session 2: Technical data needs best addressed by harvesting Solicited presentations from EPRI, DOE, NRC, and international organizations followed by open discussion Session 3: Sources of Materials Solicited presentations from EPRI, DOE, NRC, and international organizations followed by open discussion Wednesday, March 8, 2017 Session 4: Harvesting Experience: Lessons learned and practical aspects Solicited presentations from EPRI, DOE, NRC, U.S. utility, decommissioning companies, and international organizations followed by open discussion Session 5: Future Harvesting Program Planning Solicited presentations from EPRI, DOE, NRC, and international organizations followed by open and panel discussion

Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop Location: NRG Headquarteirs 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 NRG 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 I

0 0

0 0

0 l;I O

0 ooooo iooo 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

From:

Hiser, Matthew Note to requester: Attachment immediately following.

The box with the red X in the first email is an Excel attachment (Excel icon with its file name) that is imbedded into the body of the email.

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Fri, 3 Aug 2018 15:02:26 +0000 Audrain, Margaret;Purtscher, Patrick Trego11ing, Robert

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Status Attachments:

Harvesting Needs Prioritization 8-3-18.xlsx Hi guys, Here is the prioritization table we discussed yesterday. Please take a look and if you have no comments, then I'd suggest we use this for our non-RPV metals input. I'll also be sharing this with the electrical and concrete folks as a template in terms of how to rank/ comment...

Thanks!

Matt From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2018 10:28 AM To: Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick

<Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Status

<< File: Harvesting Needs Prioritization mah 8-1-18.xlsx >>

In advance of our meeting tomorrow, I tried to pull together the ranking you guys did a few months ago with the comments I had written previously. I think it'd be good for us to talk through this a little tomorrow and then I can share with the electrical and concrete folks as an example.

Thanks!

Matt

---

Origi na I Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, July 27, 2018 2:52 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Audrain, Margaret; Purtscher, Patrick

Subject:

Harvesting Status When: Thursday, August 02, 2018 9:00 AM-10:00 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: 10th floor huddle rm

Sorry - I ended up in a briefing with BC and division managers that ran long. Can you guys do Thursday morning?

Topics:

PNNL Report Meg's PNNL Visit/ Boneyard Matt's upcoming PNNL Visit Harvesting "supply" spreadsheets Harvesting needs prioritization

Criteria Title Crilicalness of Technical Gap Addressed Importance of Harvested Materials over Laboratory Aging Applicability to US Operating Fleet Regulatory Considerations Related to Inspections and AMPs Harvesting cost and complexity Timeliness of results Availability of materials for harvesting Description Harvesting to address critical gaps should be prioritized over less essential technical saps Key considerations are the ease of laboratory replication of aging mechanism and unique. field aspects of the aging mechanism.

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 arc 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 unique field aspects, legacy materials (e.g., fabrication methods, comr>0sition) 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 oblained from other sources with represen1ative properties.

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.

If mature inspection methods exist and are easy to apply to monitor degradation, harvesting may be less valuable. lfinspeclion methods do not exist. harvesting may be essential 10 ensure confidence in the assessment of age-related degradation in that particular component.The less confidence that NRC staff has in the Scoring Guidance H = high risk significance/ little to no available data MH = Medium-high risk significance/

limited data available M = Moderate risk significance I some data available ML= low to moderate risk signficance /

sufficient data available for regulatory decisions L = Low risk significance I large amount of data available H = Nearly Impossible to replicate service enviroment I critically important to use harvested materials MH = Challenging to replicate service enviromenl / important lo use harvested materials M = Possible with some limitations to replicate service enviroment / moderately important to u:.e harve:.ted material:.

ML= Not challenging to replicate service enviroment I less important to use harvested materials L = Very easy to replicate service enviroment I not important to use harvested materials H = All plants MH=AII PWRs M = All BWRs or most PWRs ML= ~10-15 plants L = <5 plants H = No or very limited inspection methods available / low confidence in AMPs MH = Limited inspection methods available / low-to-moderate confidence in AMPs M = Some inspection methods available I moderate confidence in AMPs efTectiveness of the relevant AMP, the higher priority for harves1ing. ML= Good inspection methods available

/ medium-high confidence in AMPs Activities with higher costs and complexity are less attractive than similar activities wilh lower costs and 1hat are simpler to execute..

For example, harvesting unirradiated concrete or electrical cables is less expensive and less complex than harvesting from the RPV internals or 1he RPV.

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 dala need is c\\e.arly essential and increases the priority.

L = Effective, well-accepted inspection methods exist/ high confidence in AMPs 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 H = High MH = Medium-high M = Medium ML= Medium-low L = Low

Basic Info Technlcal Criteria Proiect s-- Ifie Purposa / TS ting Criticalness of Technical Importance of Harvested Regulatory Considerations Cost I Complexity Timeliness. of Av11llablllty of Need De.scripUon Plannad Technic al Knowledge Gained Gap Addressed Mal*rial& over Laboratory Aging Al)l)llcabllhy to US Operating Fleet R elated to Inspections and AMPS Score Average Basis for Technic al Priority results m aterials for harvesting METALS Score Comment Score Comment Scor,e Comment Score Comment Score Comment EP RI performing R& D Qn L&boralory replication ~ ry NOE for yo<<j swell<<'lg : MRP diffieull to impossibkl to 227 usM J'.)t'imarily viSual Signifieanea Of void s welling al likely extent of vOO swelling in Fils dais !JiiP fo,r achieve ftuences with last.ig, whidi could <letac.t hig hec flueBCes is uncertain, Very high cost fo r Void swelling, m echanicall PWRs during e:,,:tended o peration and elflended plant representative ii'radiation Applicable to hi9h-fluenoe void swelling once fairly and inspections may detect highly irradiated 1-fil'lh flu8ne& reactor internals roM rtKls. IASCC imaet. on eraeleiM M

oooration MH eondilions MH eotnl'M'lc'IGn\\S n most PINRS MH I9tlnifieant 3.75 onset Of si J'litieant de aradatiOttl VH inttimal:!i TBD Moderete CO$! fo r P'u1pose of wort. would l>e Would greatly increase contaminattld, b ut Fracture toughness data in real Vaida1e to i:wovide real-world c.onfldence i n large set of nol irradiated, Therm~ ly :aged unirradiatl;!d Fractur l;! toughnl;!$$ :and cond~

IQ oompar1;1 to aocelera1,ed aocele,rated agrlg Yalid1;11ion of :acCli!le~ted MO$! :aippicflble to a $Ub$.el of N,o 1$1 method :av,3ilable to acCli!lerated aging daaa with primary $1.,em CASS mlcrosttucrure aoino data MH data H

I aoloo in lab tes.tJno M

PWRs H

measure bss of FT

.... testiM of un lrrad!ated materlal:s M comoonents May be possible. but difficult to replic;a1e long-t*Hgh CO$! for Modet"ate ftuenee (1*2 dpa)

Fractur e toughness and Fracture tougl1r.ess data near Nmit Conftrm regula!CM'y term aging and lrradtation Most a.p~bte to a subset of No ISi meu,oo availa ble 10 W.oold lnctease confidence.,

ltradlated CASS microstruclure re~irina further evaluation ML 06itio n MH

affect, M

PWR, H

measure b ss of FT 3.5 reQu1ator;, nncinnn H

comoonoots Moderate cost for Deter'mine whe~her sec miUgation Pu rpose of this woitt is to contaminaltld, b ul methods are effective al p re-venting Vaida1e NDE and P'u!pOse of wort would be a:ssess inspection and nol irradiated, Metallic comJ):)nen1s with NDE Sfld destructive sec; effectiveness of NOE at nitigation melhod to provide,eaJ.wodd mitigation method Increase confidence in NDE primar;,stsem known flaws examination d~ectlon and slzlno MH effeciivenes.s MH Yalidatlon of lab tes11nQ H

Applicable to ah plants M L effectiveness 3.75 and m ltJQatl<m methods M

components Moderate cost for contamin.i1ed, bu1 Purpose of~

would t>e F;:itlgve calOJla1Ions Inform not lmlldklted, Metallic oomponenl s with NDE end destructiYe Determine whether fatigue flaws are Veida1e fatigue ife to i:wovide real-world sampling inspections of Increase oonfidence i n fatigue primarystsem limitino farioue life examination resen1 in hioh usaoe localions MH methcxtolooies ML Yalida1ion of lab testino H

Aoolicable to all olants M L limi1ino faticJue locali<lns 3.2S life c alc:tAarions M

comoonoots

Baslc:lnfo Technlc..al Crlte,ta Pro]ect Specific Purpos* I THtil'lg Cr-lticalnu.s of Technical lmportsnce of Hlarvested Rogulatoiy Considerations C-o&t I Complox.ily Timolinossof Availa'bllity of Nee-d 0escrlptlon Planned Technlcal Knowledge Gained Gap Addressed Materials over L;i,bo,atol'")'

Ap pllcablllt:y to US Operating Fleet Related to Inspections arad AMPs Score Average BHls for Priority results materials for A ina hal"Ytistina ELECTRICAL Sc ore Comment Score Comment Score Comment Score Commerat Score Comment Low and m edium voltage

cable, Cables pcOlected with fire retardant coating 1 E MOVs from harsh and mild ooWooments 1 E Air oe,erated \\lalves: 4160 1 E txeakers 1 E Moldod case br.eakers 480V, 250V DC, 125 VOC, 1 E Rela~ from mild environment GE - HFA.

Agastal tlmlng relays, any from Weslinghollse. Potier Brumfield. Stuthers Dunn etc.,

Ba1terie1-

~"'euat;on*

rch interest enclosures OlstribuUoo: swltch9ear, MCCs, LCs I Contt,ol:

Horseshoe, SSCP, ASP, etc.

Baslc:lnfo Technlc..al Crlte,ta Pro]ect Specific Purpos* I THtil'lg Cr-lticalnu.s of Technical lmportsnce of Hlarvested Rogulatoiy Considerations C-o&t I Complox.ily Timolinossof Availa'bllity of Nee-d 0escrlptlon Planned Technlcal Knowledge Gained Gap Addressed Materials over L;i,bo,atol'")'

Ap pllcablllt:y to US Operating Fleet Related to Inspections arad AMPs Score Average BHls for Priority results materials for A ina hal"Ytistina CONCRET E Sc ore Comment Score Comment Score Comment Score Commerat Score Comment StruClures e:icposed to high radialion Posl-tensi'ioned s1J1Jctures Corrosion or reinPOl'Cing steeil.

t~ don. 1.-ier. embCJdment Spenl ruel pool and transfet canal-boric add arrad:: on Concrete in f>'INRs Alkali Ag!)l'egate Reaction Large slructural sections for tesling

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Attachments:

Hiser, Matthew Wed, 1 Aug 2018 14:27:46 +0000 Audrain, Margaret;Purtscher, Patrick RE: Harvesting Status Harvesting Needs Prioritization mah 8*-1-18.xlsx Note to requester: Attachment immediately following. The box with the red X in the first email is an Excel attachment (Excel icon with its file name) that is imbedded into the body of the email.

In advance of our meeting tomorrow, I tried to pull together the ranking you guys did a few months ago with the comments I had written previously. I think it'd be good for us to talk through this a little tomorrow and then I can share with the electrical and concrete folks as an example.

Thanks!

Matt

---

Origi na I Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, July 27, 2018 2:52 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Audrain, Margaret; Purtscher, Patrick

Subject:

Harvesting Status When: Thursday, August 02, 2018 9:00 AM-10:00 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: 10th floor huddle rm Sorry-I ended up in a briefing with BC and division managers that ran long. Can you guys do Thursday morning?

Topics:

PNNL Report Meg's PNNL Visit/ Boneyard Matt's upcoming PNNL Visit Harvesting "supply" spreadsheets Harvesting needs prioritization

Criteria Title Crilicalness of Technical Gap Addressed Importance of Harvested Materials over Laboratory Aging Applicability to US Operating Fleet Regulatory Considerations Related to Inspections and AMPs Harvesting cost and complexity Timeliness of results Availability of materials for harvesting Description Harvesting to address critical gaps should be prioritized over less essential technical saps Key considerations are the ease of laboratory replication of aging mechanism and unique. field aspects of the aging mechanism.

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 arc 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 unique field aspects, legacy materials (e.g., fabrication methods, comr>0sition) 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 oblained from other sources with represen1ative properties.

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.

If mature inspection methods exist and are easy to apply to monitor degradation, harvesting may be less valuable. lfinspeclion methods do not exist. harvesting may be essential 10 ensure confidence in the assessment of age-related degradation in that particular component.The less confidence that NRC staff has in the Scoring Guidance H = high risk significance/ little to no available data MH = Medium-high risk significance/

limited data available M = Moderate risk significance I some data available ML= low to moderate risk signficance /

sufficient data available for regulatory decisions L = Low risk significance I large amount of data available H = Nearly Impossible to replicate service enviroment I critically important to use harvested materials MH = Challenging to replicate service enviromenl / important lo use harvested materials M = Possible with some limitations to replicate service enviroment / moderately important to u:.e harve:.ted material:.

ML= Not challenging to replicate service enviroment I less important to use harvested materials L = Very easy to replicate service enviroment I not important to use harvested materials H = All plants MH=AII PWRs M = All BWRs or most PWRs ML= ~10-15 plants L = <5 plants H = No or very limited inspection methods available / low confidence in AMPs MH = Limited inspection methods available / low-to-moderate confidence in AMPs M = Some inspection methods available I moderate confidence in AMPs efTectiveness of the relevant AMP, the higher priority for harves1ing. ML= Good inspection methods available

/ medium-high confidence in AMPs Activities with higher costs and complexity are less attractive than similar activities wilh lower costs and 1hat are simpler to execute..

For example, harvesting unirradiated concrete or electrical cables is less expensive and less complex than harvesting from the RPV internals or 1he RPV.

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 dala need is c\\e.arly essential and increases the priority.

L = Effective, well-accepted inspection methods exist/ high confidence in AMPs 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 H = High MH = Medium-high M = Medium ML= Medium-low L = Low

Basic Info Technlcal Criteria Proiect s-- Ifie Purposa / TS ting Criticalness of Technical Importance of Harvested Regulatory Considerations Cost I Complexity Timeliness. of Av11llablllty of Need De.scripUon Plannad Technic al Knowledge Gained Gap Addressed Mal*rial& over Laboratory Aging Al)l)llcabllhy to US Operating Fleet R elated to Inspections and AMPS Score Average Basis for Technic al Priority results m aterials for harvesting METALS Score Comment Score Comment Scor,e Comment Score Comment Score Comment EP RI performing R& D Qn L&boralory replication ~ ry NOE for yo<<j swell<<'lg : MRP diffieull to impossibkl to 227 usM J'.)t'imarily viSual Signifieanea Of void s welling al likely extent of vOO swelling in Fils dais !JiiP fo,r achieve ftuences with last.ig, whidi could <letac.t hig hec flueBCes is uncertain, Very high cost fo r Void swelling, m echanicall PWRs during e:,,:tended o peration and elflended plant representative ii'radiation Applicable to hi9h-fluenoe void swelling once fairly and inspections may detect highly irradiated 1-fil'lh flu8ne& reactor internals roM rtKls. IASCC imaet. on eraeleiM M

oooration MH eondilions MH eotnl'M'lc'IGn\\S n most PINRS MH I9tlnifieant 3.75 onset Of si J'litieant de aradatiOttl 2 inttimal:!i 4 TBD Moderete CO$! fo r P'u1pose of wort. would l>e Would greatly increase contaminattld, b ut Fracture toughness data in real Vaida-te to i:wovide real-world c.onfldence i n large set of nol irradiated, Therm~ ly :aged unirradiatl;!d Fractur e toughnl;!!>S :and cond~

IQ oompar1;1 to aocelera1,ed aocele,rated agrlg Yalid1;11ion of 1;1ccele~ted Appliceble to PWR$ mor~ than N,o 1$1 method 1;1v,3ilable to accelerated aging daaa with primary $1.,em CASS mlcrosttucrure aoino data MH data H

I aoloo in lab tes.tJno MH BWRs lhk:lher te mos)

H measure bss of FT 4.5 testiM of un lrrad!ated materlal:s 1 comoone11ts 1

May be possible. but difficult to replic;a1e long-Appliceble to PWRs mor~ lhan t*Hgh cost for Modet"ate ftuenee (1*2 dpa)

Fractur e toughness and Fracture tougl1r.ess data near Nmit Conftrm regula!CM'y term aging and lrradtation BWRs (higher te mps aod No ISi meu,oo availa ble 10 W.oold lnetease confidence.,

ltradlated CASS microstruclure re~irina further evaluation ML 06itio n MH

affect, MH fluencel H

measure b ss of FT 3.75 reQu1ator;, nncinnn 2 comoonoots 5

Moderate cost for Deter'min& whe~her sec miUgation contaminaltld, b ul methods are effective al p re-venting Vaida-te NDE and Purpose of wort would be Pu rpose of this wori( is to W-ould greatly i11Ueasa nol irradiated, Metallic comJ):)nen1s with NDE Sfld destructive sec; effectiveness of NOE at nitigation melhod to provide, eaJ.wodd assess inspection method confidence i n NDE and primar;,stsem known flaws examination d~ectlon and slzlno MH effectiveness MH Yalidatlon of lab tes11nQ H

Applicable to ah plants ML effectiveness 3.75 m ltit:iatlon m e1hods 2 compone11ts 2

Moderate cost for Inspection!:! oould be, i;ontamin.i1ed, bu1 Purpose of~

would t>e pcwformed for fatigue Would gre31fy lnere3se not lmlldklted, Metallic oomponenl s with NDE end destructiYe Determine whether fatigue flaws are Veida1e fatigue ife to i:wovide real-world a-acks. but are generally c.onfidence i n fatigue life primarystsem limitino fariaue life examination resen1 in hioh usaae localions MH methcxtoloaies ML Yalida1ion of lab testina H

Aoolicable to all olants ML no1 done oroac:tive1 3.2S calculation~

5 comoonoots

Purpose, Te.sting Altcmatlve to Priority I Unique aspects of ISi Need Oetcrlptlon Planned Technical KnoWlt<lgo Gained Benefit I Significance Cost Harvesting?

Value Basis for Priority harve.sted matoria Is avallablility?

METALS RPV

• High fluence & high Measure lluence, High cost not justif.ad by benelit shift vessel with wen-toughness, & cheml~ry as Increases confidence In given survelllance specimens Vintage compositions establi'shed unlrradialed a function of through-Through lhickness section to validate existing regulatory and well~slablished and irradiation properties lhlCkOOH position tiu@nce & attonua1lot1 moooIs at]proach Hlgl'I NO LOW omr1momont \\lend coirolatlons cot1d1lions Provides data supporting e..,olution Enable measurement of from the use of conelative {Charpy-High cost not jU:s.tified by benetit bolh the CMrpy transition based} to direct measuremoo1 lncreasu contld8nce in gM!n s.urvellla~ specll'IMlns Vintage oomp0&tions RPV

• Samples fl'Qffl virtually oorve and me$1et oorve (fr.e'lcture toughnes.,-b.eis.ed) e-xiS,ting te9ulatory r;ind well-eslablished end reelis1ic irradiation any vess81 transition temp&rature TO approaCMs approach High No LOW Mlrltlletrl8t"'lt \\lend conelatlons eot1d1lions

Need Oetcrlptlon ELECTRICAL Low and medium voUage cables Cables protected wilh fue

,e1ardan1 coa1Jtlg 1E MOVs from harsh and mild envltOflrnents 1E Aft()perat8d val~s: 4160 1E breakers 1E Mo~ed case txeakets 4SOV, 250V DC. 125 VDC, 1E Relays from mild environment GE - HFA, Agastat timing relays, ariy from Westinghouse. Pone, BrumflElld, Stu1hers Du11n etc.*

Batteries Electrical penetrations Fire,cs.eateh lnl8f0$I Electrical enclosures DlstrlbubOn: switchgear.

MCCs. LC$ I Ccnirol:

Horseshoe, SSC?, ASP. etc.

Purpose, Te.sting Planned Technical KnoWlt<lge Gained Altcmatlve to Priority I Benefit I Significance Cost Harvesting?

Value Basis for Priority Medium Medium Low Low Low Low HIGH Unique aspects of ISi harve.sted materials avallablility?

Altcmatlve to Priority I Need Oetcrlptlon METALS CONCRETE Purpose, Te.sting Planned Technical KnoWlt<lge Gained Benefit I Significance Cost Harvesting?

Value Basis for Priority Fills data gap'°'

Slrvctures expo!i,ed to high Change ri properties ctve extellded plant tadlatkln to irracuatlon otfects Loss of s1rength CJua to arraciiauon oporallOn Post.tensionGd structures Corrosion of reinforcing stool, tendon, liner, embedmeni Spent fvet pool aod transfer canal--boric:: ac:id attack on concmte In PV\\l'R.s Alkali Aggregate Reaction Large structural secilons. for Eft&CtS of concrete aging le!ioting on slructural ~~i;i1y Medium Medium Medium Validate assumptions of aging effects at larger s~s High HIGH LOW LOW LOW LOW LOW Unique aspects of ISi harvuted materia ls avallablility?

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

OK From: Hiser, Matthew Purtsclher, Patrick Tue, 12 Sep 2017 09:42:08 -0400 Hiser, Matthew RE: harvesting TLR Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 9:14 AM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: harvesting TLR Hi Pat, Yeah, but I'm in early. I'll swing by your desk around 7 AM on Thursday.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Conosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-2454 I Office: TWFN I 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 8:52 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

harvesting TLR I revised the document to reflect most of Rob's comments, but there are a couple I wanted to talk to you about. Are you in training on Thursday?

Pat

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hi Matt, Litkett, Bernard Tue, 20 Sep 2016 12:37:15 -0400 Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Update Thanks for the update. Last year's RIC there was a session on SLR and another by RES, then there was a meeting with Dr Reiner Mailander, Research Coordinator at the Swiss Federal Safety Inspectorate ENSI. He wanted to talk about de-commissioning/harvesting one of their BWRs.

I was not thinking the workshop would be a RIC session, the workshop should be separate but adjoining with the RIC to give the people who attend the workshop an opportunity to attend RIC session.

Also to prevent a person who wanted to attend the workshop and the RIC from traveling twice if the workshop and the RIC were held in different weeks.

I am not sure who would tlhe best person to contact at a plant that will be decommissioning. My experience when a plant needs to be contacted, the PM in DORL for that plant is contacted first.

Bernie From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 11:15 AM To: Litkett, Bernard <Bernard.Litkett@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update Thanks Bernie!

We discussed the workshop a little more after you had to leave I think. We are not envisioning a whole RIC session for the workshop, but rather a single presentation in either a materials or SLR session. The workshop itself would be officially separate from the RIC, although we are hoping to have it adjoining the RIC to maximize participation.

For the decommissioning schedule, I have reached out to the decommissioning BC in NMSS. He said most plants are going into SAFSTOR, but he didn't much information himself, so it will be a matter of reaching out to plants individually to get any real solid information.

Thanks!

Matt From: Litkett, Bernard Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 3:55 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Collins, Jay <Jay.Collins@nrc.gov>; Cumblidge, Stephen <Stephen.Cumblidge@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>;

Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>;

Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Oberson, Greg <Greg.Oberson@nrc.gov>; Hardies, Robert <Robert.Hardies@nrc.gov>; Karwoski, Kenneth <Kenneth.Karwoski@nrc.gov>

Cc: Rudland, David <David.Rudland@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update Hi Matt, I was not present for the full meeting but I did hear some very good ideas.

1.

For international participation, I suggest March 16-17 Thursday/Friday of the RIC. Would there be a RIC session on Harvesting?

2.

Since the number of participants are unknown for now, I would reserve a large conference room.

3.

I think making an inventory/list of harvesting items wanted and assigning an importance value to each item in order to make a specific list. Also consider NOE or harvesting.

4.

Get the de-commissioning schedule. I don' know the point of contact for this Branch Chief. However, I thought the licensee's were required to keep records for a 10 year period and not destroy the records.

Bernie From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 3:29 PM To: Collins, Jay <Jay.Collins@nrc.gov>; Cumblidge, Stephen <Stephen.Cumblidge@nrc.gov>;

Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>;

Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Litkett, Bernard <Bernard.Litkett@nrc.gov>;

Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Oberson, Greg <Greg.Oberson@nrc.gov>; Hardies, Robert <Robert.Ha rdies@nre.gov>; Karwoski, Kenneth <Kenneth. Ka rwoski@nre.gov>

Cc: Rudland, David <David.Rudland@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update Thanks everyone for attending the meeting this morning. I think it was a good discussion of how we can best utilize the harvesting opportunities and hopefully brought people up to speed on the activities we have ongoing.

My request is for you to provide input on two topics by Friday:

1.

The workshop - 1 page "plan" attached to meeting notice. Any thoughts on topics, participants, location, dates, etc. are appreciated.

2.

Contacts for people that should be invited to the workshop as well as people who could be useful for getting information from decommissioning plants.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulato1y Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-2454 I Office: TWFN 1 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From:

Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 4:08 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Collins, Jay; Cumblidge, Stephen; Tregoning, Robert; Frankl, Istvan; Purtscher, Patrick; Litkett, Bernard; Poehler, Jeffrey; Oberson, Greg; Hardies, Robert; Karwoski, Kenneth Cc: Rudland, David

Subject:

Harvesting Update When: Monday, September 19, 2016 9:00 AM-10:30 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: HQ-OWFN-09B02-12p Placeholder for meeting to discuss ex-plant harvesting path forward.

Topics:

Draft PNNL report on harvesting prioritization Public workshop in March 2017 Information gathering from decommissioning plants

<< File: Harvesting Workshop Plan.docx >> << File: PNNL Report Summary Harvesting Update meeting 9-19-16.pptx >>

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Matt, Oberson, Greg Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:04:01 -0400 Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Update I would explore the possibility of getting material for DOE complex of decommissioning facilities, as well as research/test reactors. Years ago I traveled to Savannah River for a workshop organized by Bob Sindelar and Andy Duncan to discuss getting concrete from some of the old weapons production buildings. I'm sure there are many other such things out there, though relevance to LWR is likely to be hit or miss. So I'd contact Bob or try to find someone at the DOE Environmental Management office who should be local to DC and maybe at RIC anyway, unfortunately I don't have a name. I mentioned to you previously that Al Ahluwalia knows some utility in South Korea that was interested in sharing materials. You may contact him about who or what that involves.

Finally, I assume you have the Zion contacts, like Tom Rosseel at ORNL who managed that activity. If you want other ideas, please let me know.

Greg From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 3:29 PM To: Collins, Jay <Jay.Collins@nrc.gov>; Cumblidge, Stephen <Stephen.Cumblidge@nrc.gov>;

Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>;

Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Litkett, Bernard <Bernard.Litkett@nrc.gov>;

Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Oberson, Greg <Greg.Oberson@nrc.gov>; Hardies, Robert <Robert.Hardies@nrc.gov>; Karwoski, Kenneth <Kenneth.Karwoski@nrc.gov>

Cc: Rudland, David <David.Rudland@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update Thanks everyone for attending the meeting this morning. I think it was a good discussion of how we can best utilize the harvesting opportunities and hopefully brought people up to speed on the activities we have ongoing.

My request is for you to provide input on two topics by Friday:

1.

The workshop - 1 page "plan" attached to meeting notice. Any thoughts on topics, participants, location, dates, etc. are appreciated.

2.

Contacts for people that should be invited to the workshop as well as people who could be useful for getting information from decommissioning plants.

Thanks!

Matt

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 J0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Origi na I Appointment-----

From:

Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 4:08 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Collins, Jay; Cumblidge, Stephen; Tregoning, Robert; Frankl, Istvan; Purtscher, Patrick; Litkett, Bernard; Poehler, Jeffrey; Oberson, Greg; Hardies, Robert; Karwoski, Kenneth Cc: Rudland, David

Subject:

Harvesting Update When: Monday, September 19, 2016 9:00 AM-10:30 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: HQ-OWFN-09B02-12p Placeholder for meeting to discuss ex-plant harvesting path forward.

Topics:

Draft PNNL report on harvesting prioritization Public workshop in March 2017 Information gathering from decommissioning plants

<< File: Harvesting Workshop Plan.docx >> << File: PNNL Report Summary Harvesting Update meeting 9-19-16.pptx >>

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Poehler, Jeffrey Mon, 19 Sep 2016 16:15:39 -0400 Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Update Thanks Matt - let me know if you need any help getting plant contacts.

Jeff From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 3:29 PM To: Collins, Jay <Jay.Collins@nrc.gov>; Cumblidge, Stephen <Stephen.Cumblidge@nrc.gov>;

Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>;

Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Litkett, Bernard <Bernard.Litkett@nrc.gov>;

Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Oberson, Greg <Greg.Oberson@nrc.gov>; Hardies, Robert <Robert.Hardies@nrc.gov>; Karwoski, Kenneth <Kenneth.Karwoski@nrc.gov>

Cc: Rudland, David <David.Rudland@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update Thanks everyone for attending the meeting this morning. I think it was a good discussion of how we can best utilize the harvesting opportunities and hopefully brought people up to speed on the activities we have ongoing.

My request is for you to provide input on two topics by Friday:

1.

The workshop - 1 page "plan" attached to meeting notice. Any thoughts on topics, participants, location, dates, etc. are appreciated.

2.

Contacts for people that should be invited to the workshop as well as people who could be useful for getting information from decommissioning plants.

Thanks!

Matt 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 J0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Origi na I Appointment-----

From:

Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 4:08 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Collins, Jay; Cumblidge, Stephen; Tregoning, Robert; Frankl, Istvan; Purtscher, Patrick; Litkett, Bernard; Poehler, Jeffrey; Oberson, Greg; Hardies, Robert; Karwoski, Kenneth Cc: Rudland, David

Subject:

Harvesting Updat e When: Monday, September 19, 2016 9:00 AM-10:30 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: HQ-OWFN-09802-12p Placeholder for meeting to discuss ex-plant harvesting path forward.

Topics:

Draft PNNL report on harvesting prioritization Public workshop in March 2017 Information gathering from decommissioning plants

<< File: Harvesting Workshop Plan.docx >> << File: PNNL Report Summary Harvesting Update meeting 9-19-16.pptx >>

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hiser, Matthew Thu, 30 Aug 2018 20:26:11 +0000 Tregoning, Robert;Audrain, Margaret; Purtscher, Patrick RE: Harvesting Update Summary of today's meeting:

Need to meet with NRR on alignment in late September before DD meeting in early October Have a larger follow-on meeting in October to harvesting deliverables Actions PNNL Report:

o Pat and Matt working to finalize with PNNL Prioritization:

o Matt to email RPV staff (Rob, Mark, Matt G.) for input on prioritization o

Matt to follow-up with electrical and concrete staff Inventory:

Thanks!

Matt o

Pat and Matt to reach out to ANL and Battelle for input on reports tied to specific materials o

Meg to harmonize lab inventories of previously harvested materials o

Matt to look into LRAs and UFSAR for info on materials for harvesting from shutdown plants Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-24541 Office: TWFN 1 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2018 4:28 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Tregoning, Robert; Audrain, Margaret; Purtscher, Patrick

Subject:

Harvesting Update When: Thursday, August 30, 2018 9:00 AM-10:00 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p

Align on status of:

PNNL report Harvesting needs prioritization Inventory: boneyard and decommissioning plants

From:

Hiser, Matthew Sent:

To:

Fri, 21 Jul 2017 12:18:21 +0000 Purtscher, Patri ck

Subject:

RE: harvesting update (b )(6)

Without confirming receipt?... l ______

... t ***** **** ***

From: Purtscher, Patrick Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 6:08 AM To: Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

harvesting update B. Progress During the Reporting Period During the June 2017 reporting period, brief discussions with NRG-RES personnel indicated that the submitted report had not been received (possible email problems). The revised TLR was re-sent.

Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Comm ission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch 11545 Rockville Pike I Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Phone: 301-415-3942 I Office: TWFN 10A49 ptpl@nrc.gov

From:

Hiser, Matthew Sent:

To:

Tue, 20 Sep 2016 19:12:54 +0000 Hardies, Robert

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update Thanks Bob! I know this has been mentioned to Robin Dyle at a couple times, so if nothing else I can start there...

From: Hardies, Robert Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 1:29 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update As far as topics, add a discussion of establishing and international project.

Invite EPRI, MAI, public, DOE, FANC, ASN, Japan, and maybe some national labs, plus affected and interested uti I iti es.

Contacts for decommissioning plants:

Dominion (Kewaunee) Chuck Tomes charles.a. tomes@dom.com (b)(6) l I cell (b)(6) *

• l

]home 804 - 273-4384 office Exelon Jim Cirilli Corporate Engineering Programs Office:(610) 765-5786 James.cirilli@exeloncorp.com Charles A Tomes (Generation - 6)

Fort Calhoun JACOBSEN, KRISTEN G kjacobsen@oppd.com 402-533-6715 I will try to get you an EPRI contact.

Robert Hardies Senior Level Advisor for Materials Engineering Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office Phone 301 415-5802 Cell!

--- l (I:>)(?)

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 3:29 PM To: Collins, Jay <Jay.Collins@nrc.gov>; Cumblidge, Stephen <Stephen.Cumblidge@nrc.gov>;

Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>;

Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Litkett, Bernard <Bernard.Litkett@nrc.gov>;

Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Oberson, Greg <Greg.Oberson@nrc.gov>; Hardies, Robert <Robert.Ha rdies@nre.gov>; Karwoski, Kenneth <Kenneth. Ka rwoski@nre.gov>

Cc: Rudland, David <David.Rudland@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update Thanks everyone for attending the meeting this morning. I think it was a good discussion of how we can best utilize the harvesting opportunities and hopefully brought people up to speed on the activities we have ongoing.

My request is for you to provide input on two topics by Friday:

1.

The workshop - 1 page "plan" attached to meeting notice. Any thoughts on topics, participants, location, dates, etc. are appreciated.

2.

Contacts for people that should be invited to the workshop as well as people who could be useful for getting information from decommissioning plants.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-4 I 5-24541 Office: TWFN 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From:

Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 4:08 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Collins, Jay; Cumblidge, Stephen; Tregoning, Robert; Frankl, Istvan; Purtscher, Patrick; Litkett, Bernard; Poehler, Jeffrey; Oberson, Greg; Hardies, Robert; Karwoski, Kenneth Cc: Rudland, David

Subject:

Harvesting Update When: Monday, September 19, 2016 9:00 AM-10:30 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: HQ-OWFN-09B02-12p Placeholder for meeting to discuss ex-plant harvesting path forward.

Topics:

Draft PNNL report on harvesting prioritization Public workshop in March 2017 Information gathering from decommissioning plants

<< File: Harvesting Workshop Plan.docx >> << File: PNNL Report Summary Harvesting Update meeting 9-19-16.pptx >>

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Thanks Ken!

Hiser, Matthew Tue, 20 Sep 2016 12:01:50 +0000 Karwoski, Kenneth RE: Harvesting Update I totally agree that regulatory use always needs to be at the front of our mind when committing NRC resources (time, money) to any of these activities.

Matt From: Karwoski, Kenneth Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 5:33 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update

Matt, Although this may not be needed for the workshop, we (NRC) should always be able to articulate what the regulatory use of the results will be. If there is no use (updating a regulatory guide, approving a topical report,..... ) or the results will not allow us to make a regulatory decision, we should question whether we should be involved.

Ken From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 3:29 PM To: Collins, Jay <Jay.Collins@nrc.gov>; Cumblidge, Stephen <Stephen.Cumblidge@nrc.gov>;

Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>;

Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Litkett, Bernard <Bernard.Litkett@nrc.gov>;

Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Oberson, Greg <Greg.Oberson@nrc.gov>; Hardies, Robert <Robert.Ha rdies@nre.gov>; Karwoski, Kenneth <Kenneth. Ka rwoski@nre.gov>

Cc: Rudland, David <David.Rudland@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update Thanks everyone for attending the meeting this morning. I think it was a good discussion of how we can best utilize the harvesting opportunities and hopefully brought people up to speed on the activities we have ongoing.

My request is for you to provide input on two topics by Friday:

1.

The workshop - 1 page "plan" attached to meeting notice. Any thoughts on topics, participants, location, dates, etc. are appreciated.

2.

Contacts for people that should be invited to the workshop as well as people who could be useful for getting information from decommissioning plants.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-24541 Office.* TWFN 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From:

Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 4:08 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Collins, Jay; Cumblidge, Stephen; Tregoning, Robert; Frankl, Istvan; Purtscher, Patrick; Litkett, Bernard; Poehler, Jeffrey; Oberson, Greg; Hardies, Robert; Karwoski, Kenneth Cc: Rudland, David

Subject:

Harvesting Update When: Monday, September 19, 2016 9:00 AM-10:30 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: HQ-OWFN-09B02-12p Placeholder for meeting to discuss ex-plant harvesting path forward.

Topics:

Draft PNNL report on harvesting prioritization Public workshop in March 2017 Information gathering from decommissioning plants

<< File: Harvesting Workshop Plan.docx >> << File: PNNL Report Summary Harvesting Update meeting 9-19-16.pptx >>

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Audrain, Margaret Fri, 14 Sep 2018 18:43:05 +0000 Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Update (b )(6)

Hahaha, nope. I had set myself a reminder to do it... I _____________ _.

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, September 14, 2018 2:42 PM To: Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update (b )(6)

Sounds good! Just wanted to make sure it hadn't fallen off your listl... _________ __,

From: Audrain, Margaret Sent: Friday, September 14, 2018 2:39 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Cc: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Update Yes, I'm working on it. I've been having a lot of computer problems this week and it's going slower than I'd like since my computer freezes randomly and closes the document...

Meg From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, September 14, 2018 2:36 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Audrain, Margaret <Margaret.Audrain@nre.gov>

Cc: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Update Hi Meg and Pat, I just wanted to share with you guys the progress on the harvesting prioritization spreadsheet (attached). I've gotten good input for concrete and have a couple versions (one from Rob and one from Mark Kirk) for RPV. I'm still waiting on electrical input from Kenn Miller. I also added higher fluence SS welds on the "Metals" tab of the spreadsheet.

Feel free to take a look for consistency checks. Hopefully, we'III have electrical/RPV nailed down in the next couple weeks.

Also, Meg, were you going to compile/harmonize the inputs from ANL, PNNL, and Battelle?

Thanks!

Matt

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Kirk, Mark Thu, 2 Feb 2017 12:16:24 -0500 Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Workshop Thanks - I'd appreciate it if my name could be added.

I know these guys really well From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 11:12 AM To: Kirk, Mark <Mark.Kirk@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Name Organization Taku Arai CRIEPI Sadao Higuchi CRIEPI Japan Kazunobu Sakamoto JNRA Yasuhiro Chi mi JAEA Julian Soulacroix MAI Europe Rachid Chaouadi SCK-CEN Anders Jenssen Studsvik Daniel Tello CNSC Canada Desire Ndomba CNSC Karen Huynh AECL Gerry van Energy us Noordennen Solutions industry Bill Zipp Dominion Sherry Bernhoft EPRI Robin Dyle EPRI EPRI Jean Smith EPRI Al Ahluwalia EPRI Tom Rosseel DOE Rich Reister DOE DOE Keith Leonard DOE Mikhail A. Sokolov DOE Leo Fyfeld DOE/PNNL NRC/

Pat Purtscher NRC Email arait@crie12i.denken.or.j12 higuchi@crieQi.den ken.or.j Q kazunobu sakamoto@nsr.go.jQ chimi,:t:asuhiro@jaea.go.jQ julian.soulacroix@edf.fr rachid.chaouadi@sckcen.be anders.jenssen@studsvik.se daniel.tello@canada.ca desire.ndomba@canada.ca khuynh@aecl.ca gQvannoordennen@energ'{solutio ns.com willia m.f.ziQQ@dom.com sbemhoft@e12ri.com rd'f'le@eQri.com jmsmith@e12ri.com kahluwal@e12ri.com rosseeltm@ornl.gov Ric ha rd.Reister@nuclear.energ'{.g ov leonardk@ornl.gov sokolovm@ornl.gov Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov Contact Rob Rob Rob Rob Rob Rob Matt/Jean Matt Matt Matt

contracto Rob Tregoning r

Matt Hiser Pradeep Ramuhalli l-leaU1eF Malil~ewski Maybe?

Jiffi Mell~eAtAiA Uwe Jendrich Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer NRC Robe rt. T regoning@nre.gov NRC Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov PNNL Pradee~.Ramuhalli@~nnl.gov PWROG Heather.Malikowski@exeloncor~.c om PWROG molkenj~@westinghouse.com GRS Uwe.Jendrich@grs.de 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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Kirk, Mark Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 11:08 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Thanks Matt Would it be possible to also share your list of attendees?

Best mark From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2017 10:30 AM To: Kirk, Mark <Mark.Kirk@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Hi Mark, Pat Matt Matt Rob The workshop is on March 7-8 in 3WFN 1C3. I've attached a few documents describing the workshop.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of uclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-4 I 5-2454 I Office: TWFN I 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hull, Amy Wed, 8 Mar 2017 07:56:00 -0500 Hiser, Matthew;Moyer, Carol RE: Harvesting Workshop Thank you. I will be there this afternoon.

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 7:55 AM To: Hull, Amy <Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Feel free to come over for the workshop today. A few folks will not be here today, so there should be space.

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

I guess it will be me-Jeff Poehler, Jeffrey Mon, 27 Feb 2017 13:34:54 -0500 Cheruvenki, Ganesh;Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Workshop From: Cheruvenki, Ganesh Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 12:22 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew. Hiser@nrc.gov>; Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop

Matt, I would recommend that Jeff should attend.

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 11:55 AM To: Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Cheruvenki, Ganesh <Ganesh.Cheruvenki@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Hi Jeff and Ganesh, Just checking if you have nailed down who will be attending the harvesting workshop next week.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-24541 Office: TWFN 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Poehler, Jeffrey Tue, 28 Feb 2017 08:30:34 -0500 Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Workshop Matt, can you send me the scheduler?

Thanks, Jeff From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 11:55 AM To: Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Cheruvenki, Ganesh <Ganesh.Cheruvenki@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Hi Jeff and Ganesh, Just checking if you have nailed down who will be attending the harvesting workshop next week.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of uclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-24541 Office: TWFN 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Sounds good, thanks!

From: Hiser, Allen Hiser, Matthew Wed, 1 Mar 2017 20:38:40 +0000 Hiser, Allen;Yoo, Mark RE: Harvesting Workshop Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 3:34 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Yoo, Mark <Mark.Yoo@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop I will attend and Mark will use the webinar.

From : Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 7:47 AM To: Yoo, Mark <Mark.Yoo@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Allen <Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Have you guys decided who will be attending workshop?

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of uclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Con-osion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-4 I 5-2454 I Office: TWFN /OD62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Moyer, Carol Wed, 23 Nov 2016 08:32:55 -0500 Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Workshop Thanks, Matt. Happy Thanksgiving to you & yours, too!

Carol From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 8:29 AM To: Moyer, Carol <Carol.Moyer@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Hi Carol, Here's the announcement we've been using to publicize the workshop.

Please let me know if you'd like more info © Thanks and happy Thanksgiving!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US uclear Regulatory Commission I Office of uclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 30 l-415-2454 I Office: TWFN I 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Mark;Cheok, Michael

Subject:

Matt, Salley, MarkHenry Fri, 24 Feb 201710:12:19 -0600 Hiser, Matthew;Koshy, Thomas Taylor, Gabriel;Melly, Nicholas;Stroup, David;Gonzalez, Felix;Thaggard, RE: Harvesting Workshop Fantastic~ My branch could reap great benefits from a harvesting program like this ~ please keep Gabe involved and we will do everything we can to support the effort.

MHS From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 8:36 AM To: Salley, MarkHenry <MarkHenry.Salley@nrc.gov>; Koshy, Thomas <Thomas.Koshy@nrc.gov>

Cc: Taylor, Gabriel <Gabriel.Taylor@nrc.gov>; Melly, Nicholas <Nicholas.Melly@nrc.gov>; Stroup, David

<David.Stroup@nrc.gov>; Gonzalez, Felix <Felix.Gonzalez@nrc.gov>; Thaggard, Mark

<Mark.Thaggard@nrc.gov>; Cheok, Michael <Michael.Cheok@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Thanks Tom for sharing this with the right folks!

Mark, I actually remember this from when it was presented at an all-hands meeting last year I think. I'll meet with Gabe and Nick and be sure the insights from your experience are captured in our slides.

Thanks!

Matt 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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Salley, MarkHenry Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 4:34 PM To: Koshy, Thomas <Thomas.Koshy@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Cc: Taylor, Gabriel <Gabriel.Taylor@nrc.gov>; Melly, Nicholas <Nicholas.Melly@nrc.gov>; Stroup, David

<David.Stroup@nrc.gov>; Gonzalez, Felix <Felix.Gonzalez@nrc.gov>; Thaggard, Mark

<Mark.Thaggard@nrc.gov>; Cheak, Michael <Michael.Cheok@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: Harvesting Workshop Importance: High

Tom, Thanx for bringing this to my attention!!

Matt, Couple points:

1) For your success story, we had a very important one, and that is the Zion Bus duct Gabe Taylor procured a couple years ago from Zion Solutions through Oak Ridge Nat. Labs.

Testing the duct in our International High Energy Arc Fault (HEAF) program illustrated the problems with Aluminum HEAFs and is now going through the Generic Issues program. Please see Nick Melly and he can show you the test video.

2) There is a large number of items we could use for further testing, namely, any Electrical component (Bus duct, switchgear, etc.) containing aluminum or aluminum clad components. Switchgear and other assorted electrical enclosures for HRR testing.

Installed electrical cables protected with fire retardant coating.

Gabe, could you please take the lead for our branch and contact Matt to discuss?

Please let me know if you require any additional information from me.

Thanx MHS Mark Henry Salley P.E.

Chief, Fire and External Hazard Analysis Branch (FXHAB)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Risk Analysis Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Mail Stop: TWFN-10A12 Telephone: (301) 415-2474 FAX: (301) 415-6671 E-Mail: markhenry.salley@nrc.gov From: Koshy, Thomas Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 2:28 PM To: Salley, MarkHenry <MarkHenry.Salley@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: Harvesting Workshop Get into the process Thomas Koshy,

Email: Thomas.lfoshy@nrc.gov Tel: Number: 301-415-2154 Room no: TWFN-10B48 MS TWFN-10A36 Instrumentation, Controls & Electrical Engineering Branch Division or Engineering, Office or Research, USNRC From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 8:36 AM To: Sircar, Madhumita <Madhumita.Sircar@nrc.gov>; Koshy, Thomas <Thomas.Koshy@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Hi Mita and Tom, Just to follow up from our discussions yesterday, I've attached the slides for the 3 pres,entations in Sessions 2-4 of the workshop. The slides are fairly brief and intended to quickly lay out our ideas and input, but leave plenty of time for discussion.

For data needs and sources of materials, please fill in any additional input you have for electrical or concrete topics. For harvesting experience and lessons learned, please take a look and add any additional insights you think we should include in our presentation.

I've also copied below the expectations we have provided to participants for each session for your reference and awareness:

Session 2 Technical Data Needs for Harvesting Presenters share high-priority data needs that may be best addressed by harvesting Where does harvesting hold particular value compared to other sources of technical data 15-20 minute presentations followed by open discussion of technical data needs for harvesting Session 3 Sources of Materials Information on previously harvested materials and future harvesting opportunities Materials located at research and vendor facilities Decommissioning plants that may allow for future harvesting Short 5-1 0 minute presentations followed by open discussion Starting point for potential database of previously harvested materials and future harvesting opportunities Session 4 Harvesting Experience: Lessons Learned and Practical Aspects Thanks!

Matt Improving future efforts with lessons learned from past programs Pitfalls to avoid and strategies to improve likelihood of success Practical perspective from non-researchers on how harvesting interfaces with the decommissioning process International decommissioning and harvesting experience 20-30 minute presentations followed by open discussion

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 1 Office: TWFN 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Purtsclher, Patrick Fri, 27 Jan 2017 08:53:03 -0500 Hiser, Matthew;Tregoning, Robert RE: Harvesting Workshop I think the slides are good.

Pat From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 8:25 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick

<Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop

<< File: Harvesting Workshop intro slides 1-23-17.pptx >> << File: Workshop Planning 1 17.docx >>

Hi Rob and Pat, Just a quick reminder to take a look at the intro slides I've put together (updated after our meeting Monday). Once you guys are happy with them, my plan was to share with DOE and EPRI and the speakers as I am in contact with them.

I've also attached the latest version of the planning document. We are in pretty good shape for presenters. I am still tying down loose ends with the PWROG and EPRI/Korea. The other main question marks are MAI/JRC, SCK (depends on MAI/JRC), Japan, and Germany.

Thanks!

Matt From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:18 PM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick

<Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop

<< File: Harvesting Workshop intro slides 1-23-17.pptx >> << File: Workshop Planning 1 17.docx >>

Hi Rob and Pat, Thank you for meeting this morning to discuss the latest on the harvesting workshop planning.

I have updated the workshop planning document and the intro slides (attached). Please take a look at the slides and provide edits.

Action Items:

Matt: follow-up with Energy Solutions, Dominion, ENSI, Ahluwalia, AV/transcription Rob: Follow-up with GRS, MAI, JNRA/CRIEPI Rob and Pat: review slides and provide feedback Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Con-osion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-4 15-2454 I Office: TWFN I 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From:

Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 9:05 AM To: Hiser, Matthew; Tregoning, Robert; Purtscher, Patrick

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop When: Monday, January 23, 2017 9:00 AM-10:00 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Adding latest workshop planning document and draft workshop intro slides.

Following my call with DOE and EPRI last week and additional contacts we've made, let's look at the agenda and try to finalize speakers for each slot.

<< File: Workshop Planning 1-17-17.docx >> << File: Harvesting Workshop intro slides.pptx >>

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

All:

Tregoning, Robert Thu, 12 Jan 201715:18:37 -0600 Hiser, Matthew;Purtscher, Patrick RE: Harvesting Workshop I sent reminder emails today to JRC, JNRA, and EPRI (Lian). I'll let you know what I hear back.

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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 1:44 PM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick

<Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop

<< File: Workshop Planning.docx >>

Hi Rob and Pat, Thanks for the productive meeting this morning. I've attached the latest version of the planning document.

Here were each of our action items:

Rob:

Sessions 1/5 (mostly panel discussions)

Contact international participants:

o Oliver Martin - JRC o

TG Lian - EPRI/MAI

o JNRA/CRIEPI Pat:

Contact PNNL Session 2 - work with DOE (Keith Leonard) and EPRI to plan Matt:

Sessions 3/4 - work with DOE (Rosseel) and EPRI to plan Contact speakers:

o EnergySolutions o

Domirnion/utility o

IAENKrivanek Transcription/AV Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Con-osion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-4 15-2454 I Office: TWFN I 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, January 09, 2017 10:00 AM To: Hiser, Matthew; Tregoning, Robert; Purtscher, Patrick

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop When: Thursday, January 12, 2017 8:00 AM-9:00 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Can we move this a little earlier tomorrow since I now have a conflict at 9:00?

Here is a workshop planning document I've created with a list of contacts/ expected attendees and a table layiing out all the planned presentations and sessions to track confirmed speakers.

<< File: Workshop Planning.docx >>

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Matt:

Tregoning, Robert Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:25:49 -0500 Hiser, Matthew;Purtscher, Patrick RE: Harvesting Workshop I think your message is fine and it doesn't hurt to query CNSC a bit about possible contributions. We should, of course, keep in mind that there will likely be less interest in a CANDU-perspective/opportunities/issues since our focus is LWR components.

However, maybe there are other components, like cables or concrete, where there is enough similarities in operating conditions and pedigree.

Rob 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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 8:12 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick

<Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop It was a voicemail with a phone number left, so I was planning to call him back later this morning.

My plan was to deliver a similar message as you have to the Japanese: non-public workshop; we are inviting/soliciting presentations; their attendance and participation is welcome, but we are trying to keep it small and focused. Do you think CNSC could present in one of the yellow or red slots below?

Sessio Top,ic Organizatio Speaker Status n

n EPRI DOE Why our organization is interested in NRC Robert 1

harvesting Tregoning MAI or JRC JNRA PANEL DISCUSSION Overview of data needs best PNNL (for Pradeep addressed by harvesting NRC)

Ramuhalli EPRI 2

DOE Perspective on detailed data needs from harvesting MAI or JRC SCK-CEN?

JNRA CRIEPI?

Available materials from decommissioning plants and past NRC Matt Hiser harvesting programs 3

Available materials from operating EPRI reactors and past harvesting programs Available materials at DOE labs from DOE past harvesting programs (ORNL?)

International sources of materials IAEA?

EPRI Perspective on Harvesting Lessons -

Learned / Prior Experience DOE 4

NRC Decommissioning process and Energy Gerry van harvesting: schedule, site-specific, timing for different components Solutions Noordennen

5 Thanks!

Matt Utility-Owner perspective on harvesting and decommissioning International decommissioning and harvesting experience Technical information needed for informed harvesting decisions Perspective on future harvesting planning PANEL DISCUSSION Discussion of Next Steps/ Actions Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer Dominion?

Germany?

PNNL (for Pradeep NRC)

Ramuhalli EPRI DOE NRC Robert Tregoning MAI or JRC JNRA 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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 8:05 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Are you responding to CNSC?

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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2017 7:27 AM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick

< Patrick. Purtsche r@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Hi Rob, I think that is an excellent idea. I'll draft up a few slides and share with you two.

Also, I received a message on Friday from someone at CNSC indicating their interest in possibly sending a couple people to the workshop.

Thanks!

Matt 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 l 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 4:22 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Guys:

We haven't explicitly talked about this but I think it would be good to have a 5 - 10 minute talk at the very beginning of the workshop to provide the overall workshop objectives, and discuss the objectives and format/approach of the individual sessions.

Maybe it would also be good to put a few slides together now that we can send to participants so that people are as aligned as possible heading into the workshop.

Thoughts about this idea?

Cheers, Rob 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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 1:44 PM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick

< Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop

<< File: Workshop Planning.docx >>

Hi Rob and Pat, Thanks for the productive meeting this morning. I've attached the latest version of the planning document.

Here were each of our action items:

Rob:

Sessions 1/5 (mostly panel discussions)

Contact international participants:

o Oliver Martin - JRC o

TG Lian - EPRI/MAI o

JNRA/CRIEPI Pat:

Contact PNNL Session 2 - work with DOE (Keith Leonard) and EPRI to plan Matt:

Sessions 3/4 - work with DOE (Rosseel) and EPRI to plan Contact speakers:

o EnergySolutions o

Dominiion/utility o

IAEA/Krivanek Transcription/AV Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-24541 Office.* TWFN 10D62 M atthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, January 09, 2017 10:00 AM To: Hiser, Matthew; Tregoning, Robert; Purtscher, Patrick

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop When: Thursday, January 12, 2017 8:00 AM-9:00 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time {US & Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Can we move this a little earlier tomorrow since I now have a conflict at 9:00?

Here is a workshop planning document I've created with a list of contacts / expected attendees and a table laying out all the planned presentations and sessions to track confirmed speakers.

<< File: Workshop Planning.docx >>

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hi Rob, Hiser, Matthew Wed, 1 Mar 2017 14:25:24 +0000 Tregoning, Robert RE: Harvesting Workshop Not a problem - Pat, Steve, and I should be able to cover it.

Thanks!

Matt

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Tregoning, Robert On Behalf Of RES_DE_Cal Resource Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 8:38 AM To: Hiser, Matthew

Subject:

FW: Harvesting Workshop When: Thursday, March 02, 2017 9:15 AM-9:30 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: T10-E16 Matt:

I just realized that I have a 9:30 meeting tomorrow in OWFN that I can't miss.

Therefore, I'll have to miss this briefing tomorrow. It's not a big deal so I would go ahead with it unless you really feel that you want me there for support.

Rob

---

Original Appointment-----

From: RES_DE_Cal Resource Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 9:20 AM To: RES_DE_Cal Resource; Thomas, Brian; Tregoning, Robert; Frankl, Istvan; Hiser, Matthew; Vera, Graciela

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop When: Thursday, March 02, 2017 9:15 AM-9:30 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: T10-E16 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 9:09 AM To: Snail, Malika <Malika.Snail@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Quick Brief for Brian Thomas

Hi Malika, Could you schedule a 15-minute briefing with Brian Thomas on the topic of "Harvesting Workshop" for some time next week?

Attendees should be myself, Rob Tregoning, Steve Frankl, and Brian. It looks like we might all be free on Thursday, March 2 between 9:30 and 10:00.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of uclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Con-osion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-2454 I Office: TWFN 10D62

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hi Mita, Hiser, Matthew Fri, 3 Feb 2017 17:03:28 +0000 Sircar, Madhumita RE: Harvesting Workshop Yeah, you were the only person whose calendar wasn't free, so I went with it hoping you might still make it. I also invited Dogan and Jake Philip in the concrete area, so hopefully you can work with them to provide input for concrete. I can fill you in more after you return from ASME.

Thanks!

Matt From: Sircar, Madhumita Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 11:16 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop

Matt, I'll be out for ASME meeting from Feb 13-15.

Thanks, Mita Sircar Tel: 301-415-1804

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 10:54 AM To: Koshy, Thomas; Sircar, Madhumita; Murdock, Darrell; Jung, Ian; Seber, Dogan; Philip, Jacob; Tregoning, Robert; Purtscher, Patrick

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop When: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 2:00 PM-3:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p

<< File: Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop.pptx >> << File: Sources of Materials.pptx >>

You may be aware of a workshop on ex-plant materials harvesting that we are planning at NRC HQ for March 7-8. The scope of this workshop includes metals, cables/electrical, and concrete.

The purpose of the workshop and expectations for each session are captured in the PP slides attached above. We are expecting participants from DOE, EPRI, and Europe, Japan, and Canada.

The goal is to have generally short presentations with ample time for discussion and interaction among meeting participants.

I am preparing NRC presentations for sessions on data needs for harvesting, sources of materials, and harvesting experience/lessons learned, which can be found below. The data needs and sources of materials presentations should be very short (5-10 min), while the lessons learned/experience talk should be about 20 min. I have drafted slides for these presentations, particularly including input for metals.

The purpose of this meeting is to make you aware of the workshop and solicit input/assistance in developing these slides for electrical/cables and concrete topics.

<< File: NRC Technical Data Needs for Harvesting.pptx >> << File: Harvesting Workshop Announcement.docx >> << File: NRC Perspective on Harvesting Experience and Lessons Learned.pptx >>

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hiser, Matthew Mon, 23 Jan 2017 17:18:12 +0000 Tregoning, Robert;Purtscher, Patrick RE: Harvesting Workshop Note to requester: Attachments are immediately following. The boxes with the red X in the first email are a Power Point and a Word attachment (Power Point icon with its file name, and a Word icon with its file name) that are both imbedded into the body of the email.

Attachments:

17.docx Harvesting Workshop intro slides 1-23-17.pptx, Workshop Planning 1 Hi Rob and Pat, Thank you for meeting this morning to discuss the latest on the harvesting workshop planning.

I have updated the workshop planning document and the intro slides (attached}. Please take a look at the slides and provide edits.

Action Items:

Matt: follow-up with Energy Solutions, Dominion, ENSI, Ahluwalia, AV/transcription Rob: Follow-up with GRS, MAI, JNRA/CRIEPI Rob and Pat: review slides and provide feedback Thanks!

Matt 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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Origi na I Appointment-----

From:

Sent : Wednesday, January 18, 2017 9:05 AM To: Hiser, Matthew; Tregoning, Robert; Purtscher, Patrick

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop When: Monday, January 23, 2017 9:00 AM-10:00 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Adding latest workshop planning document and draft workshop intro slides.

Following my call with DOE and EPRI last week and additional contacts we've made, let's look at the agenda and try to finalize speakers for each slot.

<< File: Workshop Planning 1-17-17.docx >> << File: Harvesting Workshop intro slides.pptx >>

Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop March 7-8, 2017 USNRC HQ Rockville, MD, USA

Motivation

• With plants shutting down both in the U.S. and internationally, there are increasing opportunities to harvest components from decommissioning plants Past harvesting efforts generally more reactive and ad hoc as opportunities arose, rather than proactively planned Ex-plant materials are valuable because they have been exposed to actual in-service plant operating conditions Reduces the uncertainty associated with the applicability of the aging conditions Insights from research on harvested materials can address technical data needs identified for extended plant operation Lessons learned from past harvesting programs can help improve future harvesting efforts Challenges encountered in previous programs can be shared and mitigated or avoided in future programs

Approach

• Domestic and international researchers, industry, regulators, and decom1missioning companies 1 discuss benefits and challenges with ex-plant harvesting Encourage sharing of lessons learned as well as areas of common interest for potential new research programs

• Workshop consists of topical sessions with short presentations and significant time for open discussion Goal is to maximize engagement among all meeting participants, rather than presenter/audience mentality

• Scope includes any materials aging issue that could benefit from harvesting: metals, cables, and concrete

Expected Outcome

• Participants are better informed and aware of the benefits and challenges associated with ex-plant harvesting

• Discussions help identify areas of common interest for harvesting to address technical data needs

• Presentations and discussions provide the starting point for a "database" of harvested materials and future harvesting o p po rt unities

• Contacts are made among research organizations to allow for further discussion of specific harvesting projects

Session Expectations

• Session 1 Motivation for Harvesting Perspective from panel participants on their organizations' interest in and motivation for harvesting Brief (5-10 minute) presentation from each panel member followed by open and panel discussion

• Session 2 Technical Data Needs for Harvesting Presenters share high-priority data needs that are best addressed by harvesting from their organization's perspective

• Where does harvesting hold particular value compared to other sources of technical data 15-20 minute presentations followed by open discussion of technical data needs for harvesting

Session Expectations Session 3 Sources of Mlaterials Information on previously harvested materials and future harvesting opportunities

• Materials in "boneyards" at research and vendor facilities

• Decommissioning plants that may allow for future harvesting Short 5-10 minute presentations followed by open discussion Starting point for potential database of previously harvested materials and future harvesting opportunities Session 4 Harvesting Experience: Lessons Learned and Practical Aspects Forward-looking lessons learned from past harvesting programs

• Pitfalls to avoid and strategies to improve likelihood of success Practical perspective from non-researchers on how harvesting interfaces with the decommissioning process International decommissioning and harvesting experience 20-30 minute presentations followed by open discussion

Session Expectations

• Session 5 Future Harvesting Program Planning Technical and logistical information needed when planning a specific harvesting program Perspective from panel participants on their organizations' future harvesting planning Next steps and actions from workshop Potential areas of common interest for future harvesting programs Brief (5-10 minute) presentation from each panel member followed by open and panel discussion

Workshop Contacts Name Organization Email Contact Through NaokiSoneda CRIEPI soneda@criei:1i.den ken.or. ii:1 Rob Rachid Chaouadi SCK-CEN rachid.chaouadi@sckcen.be Rob Kazunobu Sakamoto JNRA kazunobu sakamoto@nsr.go.jQ Rob Gerry van Noordennen Energy Solutions gQvannoordennen@energ~solutions.com Pat/Tom R.

Chuck Tomes Dominion charles.a.tomes@dom.com Matt Sherry Bernhoft EPRI sbernhoft@eQri.com Robin Dyle EPRI rd1le@e12ri.com Jean Smith EPRI jmsmith@eQri.com Al Ahluwalia EPRI kahluwal@eQri.com Tom Rosseel DOE rosseeltm@ornl.gov Rich Reister DOE Rich a rd. Reister@n uclea r.ene rg1.gov Keith Leonard DOE leonardk@ornl.gov Mikhail A. Sokolov DOE sokolovm@ornl.gov Leo Fyfeld DOE/PNNL Pat Purtscher NRC Patrick. Purtscher@nre.gov Rob Tregoning NRC Robert.Tregon i ng@nre.gov Matt Hiser NRC Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov Anders Jenssen Studsvik anders.jenssen@studsvik.se Matt/Jean Daniel Tello CNSC daniel.tello@canada.ca Matt Heather Malikowski PWROG Heather.Malikowski@exeloncori'.1.com Matt Jim Molkenthin PWROG molkenj1;1@westinghouse.com Matt Regis Nhili MAI regis.nhili@edf.fr Rob Uwe Jendrich GRS Uwe.Jendrich@grs.de Rob Pradeep Ramuhalli PNNL PradeerrRamuhalli@Qnnl.gov Session NRC Lead DOE Lead EPRI Lead 1

Rob Tregoning Rich Reister Sherry Bernhoft/Robin Dyle 2

Pat Purtscher Keith Leonard (ORNL)

Sherry Bernhoft/Robin Dyle 3

Matt Hiser Tom Rosseel (ORNL)

Sherry Bernhoft/Robin Dyle 4

Matt Hiser Tom Rosseel (ORNL)

Sherry Bernhoft/Robin Dyle 5

Rob Tregoning Rich Reister Sherry Bernhoft/Robin Dyle NRC Presentations Session Topic Speaker 1

Why our organization is interested in harvesting Tregoning 2

Overview of data needs best addressed by harvesting Pradeep / PNNL 3

Available materials from decommissioning plants and Hiser past harvesting programs 4

Perspective on Harvesting Lessons Learned/ Prior TBD Experience 5

Technical information needed for informed harvesting Pradeep / PNNL decisions 5

Perspective on future harvesting planning Tregoning

Session Topic Organization Speaker Status EPRI DOE Rich Reister 1

Why our organization is interested in harvesting NRC Robert Tregoning MAI Emails exchanged JNRA/CRIEPI/JAEA Emails exchanged PANEL DISCUSSION Overview of data needs best addressed by harvesting PNNL {for NRC}

Pradeep Ramuhalli EPRI 2

Perspective on detailed data needs from harvesting DOE Keith Leonard SCK-CEN CNSC?

Emails exchanged JNRA/CRIEPI/JAEA Emails exchanged Av.ailable materials from decommissioning plants and past NRC Matt Hiser harvesting programs Available materials from operating reactors and past harvesting EPRI programs PWROG Emails exchanged 3

Available materials at DOE labs from past harvesting programs DOE Tom Rosseel Upcoming decommissioning sites Energy Solutions Gerry van Noordennen Contact through Tom R.

MAI Emails exchanged International sources of materials JNRA/CRIEPI/JAEA Emails exchanged Korea Need to work w/ Ahluwalia EPRI Perspective on Harvesting Lessons Learned/ Prior Experience DOE Tom Rosseel NRC 4

Decommissioning process and harvesting: schedule, site-specific, Energy Solutions Gerry van Noordennen Contact through Tom R.

timing for different components Utility-Owner perspective on harvesting and decommissioning Dominion or Emails exchanged Exelon International decommissioning and harvesting experience Germany?

Emails exchanged Technical information needed for informed harvesting decisions PNNL {for NRC}

Pradeep Ramuhalli EPRI DOE Rich Reister 5

Perspective on future harvesting planning NRC Robert Tregoning MAI Emails exchanged JNRA/CRIEPI/JAEA Emails exchanged PANEL DISCUSSION Discussion of Next Steps/ Actions

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Attachments:

Hi Rob and Pat, Hiser, Matthew Wed, 18 Jan 2017 16:59:19 +0000 Tregoning, Robert;Purtscher, Patrick RE: Harvesting Workshop Harvesting Workshop intro slides.pptx Note to requester: Attachment is immediately following. The box with the red X in the first email is a Power Point attachment (Power Point icon with its file name) that is imbedded into the body of the email.

Please take a look at a few slides I pulled together a11d we can discuss on Monday.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-24541 Office.* TWFN 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 4:22 PM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Guys:

We haven't explicitly talked about this but I think it would be good to have a 5 - 10 minute talk at the very beginning of the workshop to provide the overall workshop objectives, and discuss the objectives and format/approach of the individual sessions.

Maybe it would also be good to put a few slides together now that we can send to participants so that people are as aligned as possible heading into the workshop.

Thoughts about this idea?

Cheers, Rob

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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 1:44 PM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick

< Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop

<< File: Workshop Planning.docx >>

Hi Rob and Pat, Thanks for the productive meeting this morning. I've attached the latest version of the planning document.

Here were each of our action items:

Rob:

Sessions 1/5 (mostly panel discussions)

Contact international participants:

o Oliver Martin - JRC o

TG Lian - EPRI/MAI o

JNRA/CRIEPI Pat:

Contact PNNL Session 2 - work with DOE (Keith Leonard) and EPRI to plan Matt:

Sessions 3/4 - work with DOE (Rosseel) and EPRI to plan Contact speakers:

o EnergySolutions o

Dominiion/utility

o IAEA/Krivanek Transcription/AV Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Con-osion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-24541 Office: TWFN JOD62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, January 09, 2017 10:00 AM To: Hiser, Matthew; Tregoning, Robert; Purtscher, Patrick

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop When: Thursday, January 12, 2017 8:00 AM-9:00 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Can we move this a little earlier tomorrow since I now have a conflict at 9:00?

Here is a workshop planning document I've created with a list of contacts/ expected attendees and a table laying out all the planned presentations and sessions to track confirmed speakers.

<< File: Workshop Planning.docx >>

Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop March 7-8, 2017 USNRC HQ Rockville, MD, USA

Motivation

• With plants shutting down both in the U.S. and internationally, there are increasing opportunities to harvest components from decommissioning plants.

• Ex-plant materials are valuable because they have been exposed to actual in-service plant operating conditions unlike virgin materials tested under simulated conditions in the lab Reduces the uncertainty associated with the applicability of the aging conditions

• Insights from research on harvested materials can address technical data needs identified for extended plant operation

• Lessons learned from past harvesting programs can help improve future harvesting efforts

Approach

• Two-day workshop with interested stakeholders to discuss benefits and challenges associated with ex-plant harvesting.

• Insights from domestic and international researchers, industry, regulators, and decommissioning companies' experience shared Encourage sharing of lessons learned as well as areas of common interest for potential new research programs

• Topical sessions with several short presentations and significant time for open discussion Goal is open discussion and engagement among all meeting participants, rather than presenter/audience mentality

Expected Outcome

• Participants are better informed and aware of the benefits and challenges associated with ex-plant harvesting

• Discussions help identify areas of common interest for harvesting to address technical data needs

• Presentations and discussions provide the starting point for a "database" of harvested materials and future harvesting o p po rt unities

• Contacts are made among research organizations to allow for further discussion of specific harvesting projects

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Attachments:

Hi Rob and Pat, Hiser, Matthew Thu, 12 Jan 201718:44:23 +0000 Tregoning, Robert;Purtscher, Patrick RE: Harvesting Workshop Workshop Planning.docx Note to requester: Attachment is immediately following. The box with the red X is a Word attachment (Word icon with its file name) that is imbedded into the body of the email.

Thanks for the productive meeting this morning. I've attached the latest version of the planning document.

Here were each of our action items:

Rob:

Sessions 1/5 (mostly panel discussions)

Contact international participants:

o Oliver Martin - JRC o

TG Lian - EPRI/MAI o

JNRA/CRIEPI Pat:

Contact PNNL Session 2 - work with DOE (Keith Leonard) and EPRI to plan Matt:

Sessions 3/4 - work with DOE (Rosseel) and EPRI to plan Contact speakers:

o EnergySolutions o

Dominiion/utility o

IAEA/Krivanek Transcription/AV Thanks!

Matt 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 J0D62 M atthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

---

Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Monday, January 09, 2017 10:00 AM To: Hiser, Matthew; Tregoning, Robert; Purtscher, Patrick

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop When: Thursday, January 12, 2017 8:00 AM-9:00 AM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-10A73-8p Can we move this a little earlier tomorrow since I now have a conflict at 9:00?

Here is a workshop planning document I've created with a list of contacts I expected attendees and a table laying out all the planned presentations and sessions to track confirmed speakers.

<< File: Workshop Planning.docx >>

Workshop Contacts Name Organization Email NaokiSoneda CRIEPI soneda@criei:1i.denken.or.ji:1 Rachid Chaouadi SCK-CEN rachid.chaouadi@sckcen.be Kazunobu Sakamoto JNRA kazunobu sakamoto@nsr.go.jQ Gerry van Noordennen Energy Solutions g12vannoordennen@energl'.solutions.com Chuck Tomes Dominion charles.a.tomes@dom.com Sherry Bernhoft EPRI sbernhoft@e12ri.co m Robin Dyle EPRI rdl'.le@e12ri.com Jean Smith EPRI jmsmith@e12ri.com Al Ahluwalia EPRI kahluwal@e12ri.com Tom Rosseel DOE rosseeltm@ornl.gov Rich Reister DOE Richard.Reister@nuclear.energl'..gov Keith Leonard DOE leonardk@ornl.gov Mikhail A. Sokolov DOE sokolovm@ornl.gov Pat Purtscher NRC Patrick. Purtscher@nre.gov Rob Tregoning NRC Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov Matt Hiser NRC Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov Anders Jenssen Studsvik anders.jenssen@studsvik.se Session NRC Lead DOE Lead EPRI Lead 1

Rob Tregoning Rich Reister Sherry Bernhoft/Robin Dyle 2

Pat Purtscher Keith Leon1ard (ORNL)

Sherry Bernhoft/Robin Dyle 3

Matt Hiser Tom Rosseel (ORNL)

Sherry Bernhoft/Robin Dyle 4

Matt Hiser Tom Rosseel (ORNL)

Sherry Bernhoft/Robin Dyle 5

Rob Tregoning Rich Reister Sherry Bernhoft/Robin Dyle NRC Presentations Session Topic Speaker 1

Why our organization is interested in harvesting Tregoning 2

Overview of data needs best addressed by harvesting Pradeep / PNNL 3

Available materials from decommissioning plants and Hiser past harvesting programs 4

Perspective on Harvesting Lessons Learned/ Prior TBD Experience 5

Technical information needed for informed harvesting Pradeep / PNNL decisions 5

Perspective on future harvesting planning Tregoning

Session Topic Organizat ion Speaker Status EPRI DOE 1

Why our organization is interested in harvesting NRC Robert Tregoning MAI or JRC JNRA PANEL DISCUSSION Overview of data needs best addressed by harvesting PNNL (for N RC)

Pradeep Ramuhalli EPRI 2

Perspective on detailed data needs from harvesting DOE MAI or JRC SCK-CEN?

JNRA CRIEPI?

Available materials from decommissioning plants and past NRC Matt Hiser harvesting programs 3

Available materials from operating reactors and past harvesting EPRI programs Avai lable materials at DOE labs from past harvesting programs DOE (ORNL?)

International sources of materials IAEA?

EPRI Perspective on Harvesting Lessons Learned/ Prior Experience DOE NRC 4

Decommissioning process and harvesting: schedule, site-specific, Energy Solutions Gerry van Noordennen timing for different components Utility-Owner perspective on harvest ing and decommissioning Dominion?

International decommissioning and harvesting experience Germany?

Technical information needed for informed harvesting decisions PNNL (for N RC)

Pradeep Ramuhalli EPRI DOE 5

Perspective on future harvesting planning NRC Robert Tregoning MAI or JRC JNRA PANEL DISCUSSION Discuss ion of Next Stteps / Actions

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hiser, Matthew Mon, 12 Sep 2016 16:12:48 +0000 Tregoning, Robert RE: Harvesting Workshop Sounds good - thanks Rob!

I'll work on something and shoot it out here in the next few days...

From: Tregoning, Robert Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 8:39 AM To: Hiser, Matthew <Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Matt:

I just heard from a German colleague at GRS (Juergen Sievers) and we discussed the workshop. We need to send him the initial workshop announcement. He can help us get the right decommissioning people from Germany to the workshop. So, it would be good if we could develop and circulate this preliminary announcement within the next week or two.

Cheers, Rob Robert Tregoning Technical Advisor for Materials US Nuclear Regulatory Comm ission 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:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Attachments:

Hi everyone, Hiser, Matthew Wed, 24 Aug 2016 12:51:02 +0000 Frankl, lstvan;Tregoning, Robert;Hull, Amy;Purtscher, Patrick RE: Harvesting Workshop Harvesting Workshop Plan 8-24-16.docx Note to requester:

Attachment is immediately following.

I have revised this plan based on a few comments from Steve. Please take a look and provide any comments by the end of the week if possible.

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 30 l-415-24541 Office: TWFN l 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 4:23 PM To: Frankl, Istvan <lstvan.Frankl@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hull, Amy

<Amy.Hull@nrc.gov>; Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Hi everyone, Following from the meeting yesterday, I wanted to share the attached "initial plan" for the workshop, describing the puirpose and objective, approach, and intended outcome, as well as potential dates and discussion topics. Please edit and/or comment freely.

I think this document could be useful for "socializing" this topic to a greater degree in NRR, in advance of a meeting of the internal steering committee on harvesting sometime next month. At that meeting we could hopefully do some significant brainstorming on what this workshop should look like and who to contact for participation.

Thanks!

Matt 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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop 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, leveraging limited NRC resources to produce highly representative technical data of materials degradation for extended plant operation.

Approach:

NRC staff host 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.

Format will include sessions with time for presentations and open discussion of different aspects of ex-plant materials harvesting.

Views and insights from domestic and international regulators, researchers, industry, and decommissioning companies' experience will be encouraged.

Intended Outcome:

NRC staff and stakeholders are better informed of the benefits and challenges associated with ex-plant harvesting.

Contacts are made with domestic and international utilities and researchers to allow for further discussion of specific cooperative research projects that may address technical data gaps associated with materials degradation that can be best addressed through ex-plant harvesting.

Potential Dates:

March 9-10, 2017 - Thursday/Friday before RIC March 16-17, 2017 - Thursday/Friday of RIC week March 20-21, 2017 - Monday/Tuesday after RIC Discussion Topics:

Harvesting decision-making / 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 or failed 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

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Hiser, Matthew Wed, 7 Dec 2016 20:37:36 +0000 Tregoning, Robert RE: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming Note to requester: Attachment is immediately following. The box with the red X is a Word attachment (Word icon with its file name) that is imbedded into the body of the email.

Attachments:

NRC Harvesting Workshop Announcement 12-7-16.docx Hi Rob, Added some language to the announcement per suggestion from Allen. He suggested addressing whether presentations were open or solicited, as well as when more information on the workshop would be available:

"Workshop will consist of solicited presentations followed by discussion periods. Open attendance and participation in discussion is encouraged. Additional information to be provided by January 13, 2016."

Any thoughts? Look good to you?

Thanks!

Matt Matthew Hiser Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-24541 Office.* TWFN 10D62 M atthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 2:08 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Poehler, Jeffrey

<Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Allen

<Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming Updated workshop announcement as requested with figures.

<< File: NRC Harvesting Workshop Announcement 12-7-16.docx >>

Matthew Hiser

Materials Engineer US Nuclear Regulatory Commission I Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research Division of Engineering I Corrosion and Metallurgy Branch Phone: 301-415-24541 Office: TWFN 1 0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2016 10:37 AM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Poehler, Jeffrey

<Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Allen

<Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming Just wanted to send a reminder for feedback/ input on the workshop agenda.

Thanks!

Matt From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 12:46 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert

<Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming

<< File: Workshop Agenda 11-4-16.docx >> << File: NRC Harvesting Workshop Announcement.docx >>

Hi Rob, Pat, and Jeff, Please find attached my updates to the agenda based on our discussion yesterday. It may be somewhat premature, but I went ahead and tried to put times to the agenda, just to see how it might schedule out. Session 5 is probably the main area of uncertainty along with international presenters in general.

Please take a look and provide any comments or feedback by next Wednesday, so we can hopefully finalize this and share with DOE/EPRI very soon.

I also attached the latest version of the workshop announcement, which we plan to use to publicize to other attendees and presenters.

Thanks!

Matt Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2016 2:34 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Purtscher, Patrick; Tregoning, Robert; Poehler, Jeffrey

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming When: Thursday, November 03, 2016 1:00 PM-2:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-08C01-10p Hi Rob, Jeff, Pat, I've put together an outline of an agenda for this workshop on harvesting that we are planning for March. My first cut at it is attached. I'd like to use this meeting to brainstorm how to structure the workshop and, if possible, who to ask to present and on what topics.

Rob and I were discussing trying to selectively target participants and presentations to cover the topics we'd like, rather than simply asking DOE and EPRI and others for their take on "harvesting." I think if we plan this well, we can get an interesting and substantive discussion. If not, we may just get a rehash of SLR-type talks...

Thanks!

Matt

<< File: Agenda Outline.docx >>

Ex-Plant Materials Harvesting Workshop Location: NRG Headquarteirs 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 NRG 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 I

0 0

0 0

0 l;I O

0 ooooo iooo 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. Open attendance and participation in discussion is encouraged. Additional information to be provided by January 13, 2016.

Contacts:

Robert Tregoning, Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov Matthew Hiser, Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Purtsclher, Patrick Wed, 9 Nov 2016 10:59:23 -0500 Hiser, Matthew;Poehler, Jeffrey;Tregoning, Robert;Hiser, Allen RE: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming The potential speakers for the data needs is probably the biggest unknown. The Swiss were looking to us for direction on what was needed.

Pat From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2016 10:37 AM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Poehler, Jeffrey

<Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Allen

<Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming Just wanted to send a reminder for feedback/ input on the workshop agenda.

Thanks!

Matt From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 12:46 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert

<Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming

<< File: Workshop Agenda 11-4-16.docx >> << File: NRC Harvesting Workshop Announcement.docx >>

Hi Rob, Pat, and Jeff, Please find attached my updates to the agenda based on our discussion yesterday. It may be somewhat premature, but I went ahead and tried to put times to the agenda, just to see how it might schedule out. Session 5 is probably the main area of uncertainty along with international presenters in general.

Please take a look and provide any comments or feedback by next Wednesday, so we can hopefully finalize this and share with DOE/EPRI very soon.

I also attached the latest version of the workshop announcement, which we plan to use to publicize to other attendees and presenters.

Thanks!

Matt Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2016 2:34 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Purtscher, Patrick; Tregoning, Robert; Poehler, Jeffrey

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming When: Thursday, November 03, 2016 1:00 PM-2:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-08C01-10p Hi Rob, Jeff, Pat, I've put together an outline of an agenda for this workshop on harvesting that we are planning for March. My first cut at it is attached. I'd like to use this meeting to brainstorm how to structure the workshop and, if possible, who to ask to present and on what topics.

Rob and I were discussing trying to selectively target participants and presentations to cover the topics we'd like, rather than simply asking DOE and EPRI and others for their take on "harvesting." I think if we plan this well, we can get an interesting and substantive discussion. If inot, we may just get a rehash of SLR-type talks...

Thanks!

Matt

<< File: Agenda Outline.docx >>

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Matt:

Tregoning, Robert Wed, 7 Dec 2016 16:07:10 -0500 Hiser, Matthew RE: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming Just got off the phone with Sherry and Rich. Let's talk about the agenda as soon as possible, either today or tomorrow morning.

Cheers, Rob 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 fax: 301-415-6671 From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 3:38 PM To: Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming

<< File: NRC Harvesting Workshop Announcement 12-7-16.docx >>

Hi Rob, Added some language to the announcement per suggestion from Allen. He suggested addressing whether presentations were open or solicited, as well as when more information on the workshop would be available:

"Workshop will consist of solicited presentations followed by discussion periods. Open attendance and participation in discussion is encouraged. Additional information to be provided by January 13, 2016."

Any thoughts? Look good to you?

Thanks!

Matt 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 J0D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2016 2:08 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Poehler, Jeffrey

<Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Allen

<Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming Updated workshop announcement as requested with figures.

<< File: NRC Harvesting Workshop Announcement 12-7-16.docx >>

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 10D62 Matthew.Hiser@nrc.gov From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2016 10:37 AM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Poehler, Jeffrey

<Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert <Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Hiser, Allen

<Allen.Hiser@nrc.gov>

Subject:

FW: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming Just wanted to send a reminder for feedback/ input on the workshop agenda.

Thanks!

Matt

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 12:46 PM To: Purtscher, Patrick <Patrick.Purtscher@nrc.gov>; Tregoning, Robert

<Robert.Tregoning@nrc.gov>; Poehler, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Poehler@nrc.gov>

Subject:

RE: Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming

<< File: Workshop Agenda 11-4-16.docx >> << File: NRC Harvesting Workshop Announcement.docx >>

Hi Rob, Pat, and Jeff, Please find attached my updates to the agenda based on our discussion yesterday. It may be somewhat premature, but I went ahead and tried to put times to the agenda, just to see how it might schedule out. Session 5 is probably the main area of uncertainty along with international presenters in general.

Please take a look and provide any comments or feedback by next Wednesday, so we can hopefully finalize this and share with DOE/EPRI very soon.

I also attached the latest version of the workshop announcement, which we plan to use to publicize to other attendees and presenters.

Thanks!

Matt Original Appointment-----

From: Hiser, Matthew Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2016 2:34 PM To: Hiser, Matthew; Purtscher, Patrick; Tregoning, Robert; Poehler, Jeffrey

Subject:

Harvesting Workshop Agenda Brainstorming When: Thursday, November 03, 2016 1:00 PM-2:00 PM (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: HQ-TWFN-08C01-10p Hi Rob, Jeff, Pat, I've put together an outline of an agenda for this workshop on harvesting that we are planning for March. My first cut at it is attached. I'd like to use this meeting to brainstorm how to structure the workshop and, if possible, who to ask to present and on what topics.

Rob and I were discussing trying to selectively target participants and presentations to cover the topics we'd like, rather than simply asking DOE and EPRI and others for their take on "harvesting." I think if we plan this well, we can get an interesting and substantive discussion. If not, we may just get a rehash of SLR-type talks...

Thanks!

Matt

<< File: Agenda Outline.docx >>