ML051010072: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:May 16, 2005Mr. Stephen D. FloydVice President of Regulatory Affairs Nuclear Generation Division Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708
{{#Wiki_filter:May 16, 2005 Mr. Stephen D. Floyd Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Nuclear Generation Division Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708


==Dear Mr. Floyd:==
==Dear Mr. Floyd:==


This response to your letter dated March 2, 2005, takes into consideration the correspondence,dated November 30, 2004, and March 3, 2005, between Adrian Heymer, of the Nuclear EnergyInstitute (NEI), and Richard J. Barrett, of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). In yourletter, you correctly asserted that the NRC has identified two seismic issues in its review of thefirst three early site permit applications. Specifically, these issues are (1) the significance of high-amplitude, high-frequency ground motion, and (2) the determination of the safe shutdown earthquake ground motion (SSE) using the methodologies described in Regulatory Guide (RG)1.165. The management and staff of the NRC recognize the importance of resolving theseseismic issues. I agree that the issues are right for consideration, and you correctly ordered the issues in yourletter of March 2, 2005. High-frequency ground motion has been a long-term, recurring issue.
This response to your letter dated March 2, 2005, takes into consideration the correspondence, dated November 30, 2004, and March 3, 2005, between Adrian Heymer, of the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), and Richard J. Barrett, of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). In your letter, you correctly asserted that the NRC has identified two seismic issues in its review of the first three early site permit applications. Specifically, these issues are (1) the significance of high-amplitude, high-frequency ground motion, and (2) the determination of the safe shutdown earthquake ground motion (SSE) using the methodologies described in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.165. The management and staff of the NRC recognize the importance of resolving these seismic issues.
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) made an extensive effort to resolve this issue, as documented in the 1993 EPRI Topical Report, entitled "Analysis of High-Frequency Seismic Effects" (EPRI TR-102470). EPRI submitted that report for NRC review and acceptance,but little progress has been made following the NRC's request for additional information. The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) staff is already engaged in an effort toresolve these seismic issues associated with RG 1.165 and to investigate the performance-based approach mentioned in your letter for possible incorporation into the revised regulatoryguide. At this time, preliminary review has identified substantive issues that require furtherassessment from the NRC staff. The NRC has formed a Seismic Issues Technical Advisory Group (SITAG) to provide a focused effort toward resolution of the revelant seismic issues and make recommendations to NRC management. The NRC contact is Dr. Andrew J. Murphy, Chairman ofthe NRC's Seismic Issues Technical Advisory Group, at (301) 415-6011 or by email toAJM1@nrc.gov. The NRC staff is prepared to interact with industry representatives, through NEI,to develop a common understanding of the issues that concern the industry such that theirresolution is addressed in the revision of the regulatory guide.
I agree that the issues are right for consideration, and you correctly ordered the issues in your letter of March 2, 2005. High-frequency ground motion has been a long-term, recurring issue.
S. Floyd-2-The provisional schedule of meetings attached in your letter is an appropriate starting point. Toward that end, my staff had been in contact with Cedric Jobe of NEI to arrange a first meeting in April to discuss a process for cooperating on the resolution of the seismic issues related to early site permit applications. I understand that the first meeting was postponed toMay 25, 2005, because the industry experts would not be ready until that time. We lookforward to interacting with representatives from NEI and the industry toward a common understanding of the issue and to develop a resolution to support the NP2010 initiative.Sincerely,/RA/Carl J. Paperiello, DirectorOffice of Nuclear Regulatory Research S. Floyd-2-The provisional schedule of meetings attached in your letter is an appropriate starting point. Toward that end, my staff had been in contact with Cedric Jobe of NEI to arrange a first meeting in April to discuss a process for cooperating on the resolution of the seismic issues related to early site permit applications. I understand that the first meeting was postponed toMay 25, 2005, because the industry experts would not be ready until that time. We lookforward to interacting with representatives from NEI and the industry toward a common understanding of the issue and to develop a resolution to support the NP2010 initiative.Sincerely,/RA/Carl J. Paperiello, DirectorOffice of Nuclear Regulatory ResearchDISTRIBUTION:DET r/fERAB r/fR. BarrettM. CunninghamM. EvansA. HsiaA. MurphyM. MayfieldK. ManolyE. ImbroT. Clark (RES2005076
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) made an extensive effort to resolve this issue, as documented in the 1993 EPRI Topical Report, entitled Analysis of High-Frequency Seismic Effects (EPRI TR-102470). EPRI submitted that report for NRC review and acceptance, but little progress has been made following the NRCs request for additional information.
)DOCUMENT NAME: E:\Filenet\ML051010072.wpd*See Previous ConcurrenceOAR in ADAMS? (Y or N)       Y       ADAMS ACCESSION NO: ML051010072 TEMPLATE NO. RES-006Publicly Available? (Y or N)   Y       DATE OF RELEASE TO PUBLIC:   5/17/05     SENSITIVE?       N         To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box:  
The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) staff is already engaged in an effort to resolve these seismic issues associated with RG 1.165 and to investigate the performance-based approach mentioned in your letter for possible incorporation into the revised regulatory guide. At this time, preliminary review has identified substantive issues that require further assessment from the NRC staff. The NRC has formed a Seismic Issues Technical Advisory Group (SITAG) to provide a focused effort toward resolution of the revelant seismic issues and make recommendations to NRC management. The NRC contact is Dr. Andrew J. Murphy, Chairman of the NRCs Seismic Issues Technical Advisory Group, at (301) 415-6011 or by email to AJM1@nrc.gov. The NRC staff is prepared to interact with industry representatives, through NEI, to develop a common understanding of the issues that concern the industry such that their resolution is addressed in the revision of the regulatory guide.
"C" = Copy without attachment/enclosure   "
 
E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure   "
S. Floyd                                         The provisional schedule of meetings attached in your letter is an appropriate starting point.
N" = No copyOFFICERES/DET/ERABRES/DET/ERABRES/DET/ERABRES/DETNAMEAMurphy /RA/AHsia /RA/MEvans /RA/RBarrett /RA/DATE5/13/055/13/055/13/055/13/05OFFICE*Tech EditorN*NRRRESNAMEPGarrity MMayfield /RA/CPaperiello /RA/DATE3/25/054/8/05   &   5/13/055/16/05OFFICIAL RECORD COPYOFFICESISP ReviewSISP Review NAMEAMurphy /MGE for/MEvans /RA/DATE 4/8/054/8 /05}}
Toward that end, my staff had been in contact with Cedric Jobe of NEI to arrange a first meeting in April to discuss a process for cooperating on the resolution of the seismic issues related to early site permit applications. I understand that the first meeting was postponed to May 25, 2005, because the industry experts would not be ready until that time. We look forward to interacting with representatives from NEI and the industry toward a common understanding of the issue and to develop a resolution to support the NP2010 initiative.
Sincerely,
                                                /RA/
Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
 
S. Floyd                                                                         The provisional schedule of meetings attached in your letter is an appropriate starting point.
Toward that end, my staff had been in contact with Cedric Jobe of NEI to arrange a first meeting in April to discuss a process for cooperating on the resolution of the seismic issues related to early site permit applications. I understand that the first meeting was postponed to May 25, 2005, because the industry experts would not be ready until that time. We look forward to interacting with representatives from NEI and the industry toward a common understanding of the issue and to develop a resolution to support the NP2010 initiative.
Sincerely,
                                                                                /RA/
Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research DISTRIBUTION:               DET r/f                            ERAB r/f                              R. Barrett                          M. Cunningham M. Evans                          A. Hsia                              A. Murphy                            M. Mayfield K. Manoly                          E. Imbro                              T. Clark (RES2005076)
DOCUMENT NAME: E:\Filenet\ML051010072.wpd
*See Previous Concurrence OAR in ADAMS? (Y or N)               Y             ADAMS ACCESSION NO: ML051010072                               TEMPLATE NO. RES-006 Publicly Available? (Y or N) Y                     DATE OF RELEASE TO PUBLIC: 5/17/05                             SENSITIVE?           N To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: C = Copy without attachment/enclosure E = Copy with attachment/enclosure N = No copy OFFICE              RES/DET/ERAB                          RES/DET/ERAB                        RES/DET/ERAB                        RES/DET NAME                AMurphy /RA/                         AHsia /RA/                           MEvans /RA/                         RBarrett /RA/
DATE                5/13/05                              5/13/05                              5/13/05                            5/13/05 OFFICE              *Tech Editor                    N    *NRR                                RES NAME                PGarrity                              MMayfield /RA/                       CPaperiello /RA/
DATE                3/25/05                              4/8/05 & 5/13/05                    5/16/05 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY OFFICE                  SISP Review                        SISP Review NAME                    AMurphy /MGE for/                 MEvans /RA/
DATE                     4/8/05                            4/8 /05}}

Latest revision as of 00:30, 24 November 2019

Response to NEI March 2 Letter on 1(1).165 - Seismic Issues Associated with Early Site Permits
ML051010072
Person / Time
Issue date: 05/16/2005
From: Paperiello C
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
To: Floyd S
Nuclear Energy Institute
References
FOIA/PA-2009-0035, RG-1.165
Download: ML051010072 (3)
v • d • e


Text

May 16, 2005 Mr. Stephen D. Floyd Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Nuclear Generation Division Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708

Dear Mr. Floyd:

This response to your letter dated March 2, 2005, takes into consideration the correspondence, dated November 30, 2004, and March 3, 2005, between Adrian Heymer, of the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), and Richard J. Barrett, of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). In your letter, you correctly asserted that the NRC has identified two seismic issues in its review of the first three early site permit applications. Specifically, these issues are (1) the significance of high-amplitude, high-frequency ground motion, and (2) the determination of the safe shutdown earthquake ground motion (SSE) using the methodologies described in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.165. The management and staff of the NRC recognize the importance of resolving these seismic issues.

I agree that the issues are right for consideration, and you correctly ordered the issues in your letter of March 2, 2005. High-frequency ground motion has been a long-term, recurring issue.

The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) made an extensive effort to resolve this issue, as documented in the 1993 EPRI Topical Report, entitled Analysis of High-Frequency Seismic Effects (EPRI TR-102470). EPRI submitted that report for NRC review and acceptance, but little progress has been made following the NRCs request for additional information.

The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) staff is already engaged in an effort to resolve these seismic issues associated with RG 1.165 and to investigate the performance-based approach mentioned in your letter for possible incorporation into the revised regulatory guide. At this time, preliminary review has identified substantive issues that require further assessment from the NRC staff. The NRC has formed a Seismic Issues Technical Advisory Group (SITAG) to provide a focused effort toward resolution of the revelant seismic issues and make recommendations to NRC management. The NRC contact is Dr. Andrew J. Murphy, Chairman of the NRCs Seismic Issues Technical Advisory Group, at (301) 415-6011 or by email to AJM1@nrc.gov. The NRC staff is prepared to interact with industry representatives, through NEI, to develop a common understanding of the issues that concern the industry such that their resolution is addressed in the revision of the regulatory guide.

S. Floyd The provisional schedule of meetings attached in your letter is an appropriate starting point.

Toward that end, my staff had been in contact with Cedric Jobe of NEI to arrange a first meeting in April to discuss a process for cooperating on the resolution of the seismic issues related to early site permit applications. I understand that the first meeting was postponed to May 25, 2005, because the industry experts would not be ready until that time. We look forward to interacting with representatives from NEI and the industry toward a common understanding of the issue and to develop a resolution to support the NP2010 initiative.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research

S. Floyd The provisional schedule of meetings attached in your letter is an appropriate starting point.

Toward that end, my staff had been in contact with Cedric Jobe of NEI to arrange a first meeting in April to discuss a process for cooperating on the resolution of the seismic issues related to early site permit applications. I understand that the first meeting was postponed to May 25, 2005, because the industry experts would not be ready until that time. We look forward to interacting with representatives from NEI and the industry toward a common understanding of the issue and to develop a resolution to support the NP2010 initiative.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Carl J. Paperiello, Director Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research DISTRIBUTION: DET r/f ERAB r/f R. Barrett M. Cunningham M. Evans A. Hsia A. Murphy M. Mayfield K. Manoly E. Imbro T. Clark (RES2005076)

DOCUMENT NAME: E:\Filenet\ML051010072.wpd

  • See Previous Concurrence OAR in ADAMS? (Y or N) Y ADAMS ACCESSION NO: ML051010072 TEMPLATE NO. RES-006 Publicly Available? (Y or N) Y DATE OF RELEASE TO PUBLIC: 5/17/05 SENSITIVE? N To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: C = Copy without attachment/enclosure E = Copy with attachment/enclosure N = No copy OFFICE RES/DET/ERAB RES/DET/ERAB RES/DET/ERAB RES/DET NAME AMurphy /RA/ AHsia /RA/ MEvans /RA/ RBarrett /RA/

DATE 5/13/05 5/13/05 5/13/05 5/13/05 OFFICE *Tech Editor N *NRR RES NAME PGarrity MMayfield /RA/ CPaperiello /RA/

DATE 3/25/05 4/8/05 & 5/13/05 5/16/05 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY OFFICE SISP Review SISP Review NAME AMurphy /MGE for/ MEvans /RA/

DATE 4/8/05 4/8 /05

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML051010072&oldid=2198611"