ML16228A062

Summary of July 26, 2016, Public Meeting on Status of Associated Effects Submittals Related to the Reevaluated Flood Hazards at Exelon Generation Company, LLC Sites as Part of the Response to Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1, Floodin

ML16228A062
Person / Time
Site:	Calvert Cliffs, Peach Bottom, Oyster Creek, Three Mile Island, Ginna, Quad Cities, LaSalle
Issue date:	08/15/2016
From:	Tekia Govan Japan Lessons-Learned Division
To:	Gregory Bowman Japan Lessons-Learned Division
Shared Package
ML16228A030	List: ML16228A062
References
Download: ML16228A062 (7)

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 August 18, 2016 LICENSEE: Exelon Generation Company, LLC FACILITIES: Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2 Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3 Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1

SUMMARY

OF JULY 26, 2016, PUBLIC MEETING ON STATUS OF ASSOCIATED EFFECTS SUBMITTALS RELATED TO THE REEVALUATED FLOOD HAZARDS AT EXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC SITES AS PART OF THE RESPONSE TO NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.1, "FLOODING" On July 26, 2016, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRG) staff held a Category 2 public meeting 1 with stakeholders to discuss with Exelon Generation Company, LLC (Exelon, the licensee) the current status of their associated effects submittals related to the reevaluated flood hazards at Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2; LaSalle County Station, Units 1 and 2; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station; Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2 and 3; Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station; R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant; and Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1; and the paths forward for the NRG staff's review of the associated effects.

During this meeting, Exelon presented slides 2 that provided a summary of the parameters, for each site, that will be submitted to address associated effects and/or flood event duration. The presentation and slide material allowed the NRG staff the opportunity to provide feedback to the licensee to ensure each site submittal covered the parameters needed to complete the mitigation strategies assessment review. Based on the NRG staff's input to the proposed submittal information, the licensee provided a path forward for each site and committed to provide the associated effects information for each site by August 30, 2016. of this letter summarizes the NRG staff comments, concerns, and questions for each site presented by the licensee and the agreed upon path forward for each site.

Prior to concluding the meeting, an opportunity for public comment and questions was afforded.

1 The original meeting notice is available via the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML16195A331.

2 The Exelon presentation can be found at ADAMS Accession No. ML16228A051.

Please direct any inquiries to me at 301-415-6197 orTekia.Govan@nrc.gov.

Tekia Govan, Project Manager Hazards Management Branch Japan Lessons-Learned Division Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos: 50-317 and 50-318 (Calvert Cliffs)

Docket No: 50-244 (Ginna)

Docket Nos: 50-373 and 50-374 (LaSalle)

Docket No: 50-219 (Oyster Creek)

Docket Nos: 50-277 and 50-278 (Peach Bottom)

Docket Nos: 50-254 and 50-265 (Quad Cities)

Docket No: 50-289 (Three Mile Island)

Enclosures:

1. Summary of the Discussion with Exelon on Flood Event Duration and Associate Effects Issues

2. Lists of Attendees cc w/encls distribution via Listserv

ENCLOSURE 1: Summary of the Discussion with Exelon on Flood Event Duration and Associate Effects Issues NRC Staff's Concerns Discussed durinQ MeetinQ Licensee Proposed Path Forward Calvert Cliffs The NRC staff noted that the flood hazard The licensee stated that the September 2015 reevaluation report (FHRR) does not contain FHRR submittal for Calvert Cliffs shows a storm surge inundation time and period of bounding current design-basis (COB) and recession. therefore no additional information is required for storm surge.

However, storm surge will be addressed in the G.2 and G.3 portions of the mitigation strategies assessment (MSA) and follow Path 1 in the focused evaluation (FE).

Ginna The NRC staff noted that the FHRR does not The licensee stated that:

contain:

I) Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 15-05 I) warning time for local intense precipitation guidance will be used for LIP warning (LIP), and time.

2) associated effect (AE) parameters for LIP 2) The AE for LIP will be addressed in the and probable maximum flooding (PMF). MSA and FE and that PMF AEs will be redefined in a supplemental report to address site-specific revision to rivers/stream flooding mechanism by the end of September 2016.

LaSalle

1) The NRC staff noted that the FHRR does 1, 2, 3) The licensee said they will look into these not contain warning time and period son issues and address them in the inundation for LIP and recession is associated effects supplemental letter defined differently in the FHRR than in the which will be submitted to NRC by the end guidance provided in NEI 16-05. of August 2016.

2) The licensee should clarify how the maximum LIP hydrodynamic loads were calculated for different locations. Are they based on maximum inundation depth or velocity?

3) For storm surge in the cooling pond, provide detail on why debris load was not considered. FHRR Table 4 states air-borne tornado missile load bounds water-borne debris load. The NRC staff noted that the two loads are different in origin and be used differently in structural

NRC Staff's Concerns Discussed durinq Meetinq Licensee Proposed Path Forward analyses. Therefore, water-borne debris load must be defined or discussed.

Oyster Creek The NRC staff noted that the FHRR does not The licensee said they will clarify/address this contain warning time and periods of recession for issue in the associated effects supplemental letter LIP and dam failure flood information is also which will be submitted to NRC by the end of missinq. August 2016.

Peach Bottom

1) The NRC staff noted that periods of 1) The licensee stated that they will inundation and recession are defined clarify/address this issue in the associated differently in the FHRR than in the effects supplemental letter which will be guidance provided in NEI 16-05. submitted to NRC by the end of August 2016.

2) The NRC staff noted that AE parameters for storm surge, ice, and seiche events 2) The licensee stated that the AE for surge, are missing in the FHRR. The AE ice, and seiche would be minimal.

parameters were provided for a bounding However, in the August 2016 AE combined dam failure which is not submittal, they will include discussions of bounded by the COB. Some AE the AE for surge, ice, or seiche parameters for these controlling events qualitatively (with some calculations as may not be bounded by respective AE needed), or justifications why they are not parameters for a combined dam failure applicable.

event (e.g., effects of ice jam/load, low temperature, or other adverse weather, etc.). Provide additional AE parameters (if applicable) for these controlling events, or justify why they are not applicable.

Quad Cities

1) The NRC staff noted that LIP flood event 1) The NEI 15-05 guidance will be used for duration parameters were not included in the LIP warning time. Both the licensee and FHRR. the NRG staff agree that periods of inundation and recession for LIP are not significant, thus be addressed in the

2) The NRC staff also noted that the warning time MSA/FE stage.

for hydrologic dam failure flood does not include storm forecasting time which may be 2) The licensee stated that the dam failure an important parameter for triggering flood warning time of 172 hours0.00199 days <br />0.0478 hours <br />2.843915e-4 weeks <br />6.5446e-5 months <br /> does not protection and mitigation actions. Information include storm forecasting time as the pertaining to recession time for dam failure warning time is sufficiently long enough to flood is also missing. prepare flood preparation. The August 2016 AE submittal will clarify this issue in addition to discussing the period of recession.

Three Mile Island

1) The NRC staff noted that periods of 1) The licensee stated that they will inundation and recession are defined clarify/address this issue in the associated

NRC Staff's Concerns Discussed during Meeting Licensee Proposed Path Forward differently in the FHRR than in the effects supplemental letter which will be guidance provided in NEI 16-05. submitted to NRC by the end of August 2016.

2) The NRC staff also noted that the AE for ice is missing from the FHRR, while the 2) The licensee stated that the AE for ice AE parameters for a bounding combined would be minimal. However, in the dam failure are provided. Some AE August 2016 AE submittal, they will parameters for ice may not be bounded include discussions of the AE for surge, by respective AE parameters for a ice, or seiche qualitatively (with some combined dam failure event (e.g., effects calculations as needed), or justifications of ice jam/load, low temperature, or other why they are not applicable.

adverse weather, etc.). Provide additional AE parameters (if applicable) for ice, or justify why they are not aoolicable.

ENCLOSURE 2 PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS STATUS OF ASSOCIATED EFFECTS SUBMITTALS RELATED TO THE REEVALUATED FLOOD HAZARDS AT EXELON GENERATION COMPANY, LLC SITES July 26, 2016 List of Attendees Name: Organization: Name: Organization:

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Exelon, Calvert Cliffs Tekia Govan Chuck Merritt Commission (NRC)

Greo Bowman NRC Sheldon Waiters Exelon, Calvert Cliffs Anthony Minarik NRC Dustin Damhoff Exelon, Quad Cities Hosuno Ahn NRC Chuck Behrend Exelon Ken See NRC Vinod Aaaarwal Exelon Lyle Hibler NRC Joe Bellini Exelon Chris Cook NRC David Distel Exelon Aida Rivera NRC Greo Enoels Exelon, LaSalle Jana Bergman Curtis Wright William Exelon, Three Mile Island Mcsorley Brenda Kovarik AEP - Cook Val Samlal Exelon, Oyster Creek Curtis Smith Idaho National John Traynor Exelon, Ginna Laboratory Georoe Wrobel Exelon, Ginna

Please direct any inquiries to me at 301-415-6197 orTekia.Govan@nrc.gov.

Sincerely, IRA/

Tekia Govan, Project Manager Hazards Management Branch Japan Lessons-Learned Division Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos: 50-317 and 50-318 (Calvert Cliffs)

Docket No: 50-244 (Ginna)

Docket Nos: 50-373 and 50-37 4 (LaSalle)

Docket No: 50-219 (Oyster Creek)

Docket Nos: 50-277 and 50-278 (Peach Bottom)

Docket Nos: 50-254 and 50-265 (Quad Cities)

Docket No: 50-289 (Three Mile Island)

Enclosures:

1. Summary of the Discussion with Exelon on Flood Event Duration and Associate Effects Issues

2. Lists of Attendees cc w/encls distribution via Listserv DISTRIBUTION PUBLIC JLD R/F RidsNRRJLD Resource RidsNrrDorllpl 1-1 Resource LQuinn-Willingham, NRO RidsNroDsea Resource RidsNrrDorllpl 1-2Resource RidsNrrDorl Resource Mlee, NRO RidsNrrPMOysterCreek Resource MShams, NRR CCook, NRO RidsRgn1 MailCenter Resource RidsNrrLASLent RidsOpaMailResource RidsRgn3MailCenter Resource MWillingham, NRO ARivera-Varona, NRO RidsAcrsAcnw_MailCtr Resource HAhn, NRO KSee, NRO RidsOgcMailCenter Resource TGovan, NRR RidsNrrDorllpl3-1 Resource RidsNrrDorllpl3-2Resource ACampbell, NRO Gbowman, NRR ADAMS Access1on Pac kage No.: ML16228A030 Meef m~ S ummary ML16228A062 via e-ma ii OFFICE NRR/JLD/JHMB/PM NRR/JLD/ LA NRR/JLD/JHMB/BC NRR/JLD/JHMB/PM NAME TGovan Slent GBowman TGovan DATE 08/18/2016 08/16/2016 08/18/2016 08/18/2016 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY