ML14210A050

June 30, 2014, Summary of the Category 1 Public Meeting with Duke Energy Progress Inc. to Discuss Seismic Hazard Reevaluations Associated with Implementation of Japan Lessons-Learned Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1

ML14210A050
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick, Robinson
Issue date:	07/30/2014
From:	Michael Balazik Japan Lessons-Learned Division
To:
Balazik M, NRR/JLD, 415-2856
References
Download: ML14210A050 (6)

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 August 7, 2014 LICENSEE: Duke Energy Progress, Inc.

FACILITIES: Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2 H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No.2

SUMMARY

OF THE JUNE 30, 2014, CATEGORY 1 PUBLIC MEETING WITH DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS INC. TO DISCUSS SEISMIC HAZARD REEVALUATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF JAPAN LESSONS-LEARNED NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.1.

On June 30, 2014, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) held a Category 1 public meeting 1 with Duke Energy Progress, Inc. (Duke Energy) for Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2 (Brunswick), and H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (Robinson). The purpose of this meeting was to discuss issues resulting from the staff's screening and prioritization of Robinson related to Enclosure 1, Recommendation 2. 1: Seismic of the March 12, 2012, NRC request for information per Title 10 to the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 50, Section 50.54(f) letter (hereafter referred to as the 50.54(f) letter). By letter dated May 9, 2014, 3 the NRC staff categorized Robinson, Unit No. 2, as "screened in" to perform additional seismic evaluations, prioritization group 1 plant, with a risk evaluation due by June 17,2017, based on the staff's screening review. By memo dated May 21,2014, the NRC staff documented their preliminary Ground Motion Response Spectra (GMRS) curve in comparison to all licensee GMRS curves along with the plant's Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) and Individual Plant Examination of External Events (IPEEE) High Confidence Low Probability of Failure (HCLPF) Spectra, also known as the IHS (IPEEE HCLPF Spectra). The public meeting supported information exchange and understanding of engineering differences to achieve subsequent technical resolution.

1 The original meeting notice is available via the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) under Accession No. ML14167A164.

2 The 50.54(f) letter and Enclosure 1 are available under ADAMS Accession Nos. ML12053A340 and ML12056A047.

3 The May 9, 20141etter is available under ADAMS Accession No. ML14111A147.

To facilitate the discussion, the NRC staff and Duke Energy representatives presented 4 the engineering details on the modeling inputs used to develop GMRS curves for Robinson. The meeting highlights included:

• NRC has completed initial review of licensee independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) and other technical reports and has modified the preliminary GMRS curve to reflect the additional information. NRC staff will continue to review audit reports to determine the scope of information to be docketed to support final regulatory review.

• Licensee plans to gather additional geotechnical data through onsite exploration during summer of 2014 and technical evaluations in fall of 2014.

• Licensee site data will be used to revise the seismic GMRS hazard curve, as well as supporting the June 30, 2017 seismic Probabilistic Risk Assessment modeling. NRC staff emphasized the importance of ensuring that committed schedules will not be impacted by additional exploration and evaluations. Licensee committed to working with staff on exploration schedules and to continue information exchange in support of the staff's ongoing review.

• NRC staff requested that additional exploration and Seismic Re-evaluation report revisions be completed no later than December 2014 to support staff review schedules.

• NRC staff was supportive of licensee exploration plan as the site is not well characterized and that additional geotechnical data should address questions related to soil/rock shear wave velocities, epistemic uncertainty, and kappa.

• NRC staff position is either use the Central and Eastern United States Seismic Source Characterization (CEUS SSG) unmodified (in accordance with the Screening, Prioritization and Implementation Details) or use Senior Seismic Hazard Analysis Committee (SSHAC) for modifications as described in NUREG-2117, "Practical Implementation Guidelines for SSHAC Level 3 and 4 Hazard Studies."

In summary, the NRC staff stated that the primary differences between the NRC staff and licensee GMRS curves appear to result from:

• Impact of licensee's update of CEUS-SSC

• Thickness of alluvium layer

• NRC shear-wave velocity profiles based on regional measurements of Middendorf formation

• Large epistemic uncertainty in licensee's shear-wave velocity profiles

• Use of Electric Power Research Institute Rock (M3) for lower base case velocity profile (P2)

The NRC staff and Duke Energy also discussed the IPEEE adequacy used for seismic screening of Brunswick, Unit 2. The IPEEE discussion included the evaluation of the following topics:

• Intake canal slope stability

• Seismic Hazard and Screening Report reference correction 4

The NRC and Duke Energy slides can be found under ADAMS Accession Nos. ML14181A078 and ML14181A032.

Finally, the NRC stated that a follow up request for additional information may be issued to document the licensee's technical basis and background information, as well as any other clarifications associated with the information presented at the meeting.

No regulatory decisions or commitments were made during the meeting. The public was invited to observe the meeting and was given several opportunities to communicate with the NRC during the public meeting and before adjourning. The NRC staff received no public comments and no meeting feedback forms.

Please direct any inquiries to me at 301-415-2856, or Michaei.Balazik@nrc.gov.

~ft.. Projec Hazards Management Branch nager Japan Lessons-Learned Division Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket Nos. 50-325, 50-324, and 50-261

Enclosure:

List of Attendees cc w/encl: Distribution via Listserv

List of Attendees U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public Meeting with Duke Energy Concerning Seismic Hazard Reevaluation Submittals Japan Lessons-Learned Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic June 30. 2014 Name Organization Name Organization Jon Ake NRC/RES/DE Donald Moore Southern Nuclear Cliff Munson NRC/NRO/DSEA John Anderson AEP Diane Jackson NRC/NRO/DSEA John Richards EPRI Nicholas DiFrancesco NRC/NRR/JLD Steve Callis Duke Energy Vladimir Graizer NRC/NRO/DSEA AI Butcavage NRC Michael Balazik NRC/NRR/JLD Waters, Joe AEP Andrea Kock NRC/NRO/DSEA Justin Huber TVA Juan Uribe NRC/NRR/JLD Andy Hon NRC/NRR/DORL David Ma Argonne National Lab Donnie Harrison NRC/NRO/DSRA Walt Silva Pacific Engineering Ricardo Rodriguez NRC/NRO/DSEA Nick Gregor Bechtel Jim Kammer Duke Energy Todd Beane Duke Energy Brian McCabe Duke Energy John Voss Dominion Greg Robinson Duke Energy Mary Green Duke Energy Rob Sewell Structural Integrity Andrew Mauer NEI Associates John Mcintyre Duke Energy Paul Guill Duke Energy AI Maysam AMEC Brenda Kovarik, AEP Lettis Consultants (continues to next page)

Robin McGuire International Abbreviations:

AEP- American Electric Power DE - Division of Engineering DSEA - Division of Site Safety and Environmental Analysis DSRA - Division of Safety Systems & Risk Assessment EPRI- Electric Power Research Institute JLD- Japan Lessons-Learned Division NEI -Nuclear Energy Institute NRO - Office of New Reactors NRR- Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation RES - Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research TVA- Tennessee Valley Authority Enclosure

Name Organization Name Organization Jose Blanco, Rizzo Associates Nadja Paulman Xcel Nuclear Dan Ludwig Xcel Nuclear Gina Symons Duke Energy Robert Keiser Duke Energy

..* ML 1421 OAOSO OFFICE NRR/JLD/JHMB/PM NRR/JLD/LA NRR/JLD/JHMB/BC NRR/JLD/JHMB/PM NAME MBalazik Slent SWhaley MBalazik DATE 07/28/14 07/29/14 07/30/14 08/07/14