ML003781998: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 24: Line 24:
OF PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (NEI) AND THE PUBLIC REGARDING POWER REACTOR DECOMMISSIONING RULEMAKING ISSUES On November 27, 2000, the NRC staff met with representatives of NEI and members of the public to receive feedback about ongoing NRC efforts to determine the risk posed by permanently shutdown nuclear power plants and the status of NRC efforts to amend its regulations to properly reflect the risk posed by these facilities. The meeting agenda is provided in Enclosure 1. An additional agenda topic associated with a generic issue related to a Maine Yankee security exemption request was requested by NEI at the beginning of the meeting. A list of attendees is provided in Enclosure 2.
OF PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (NEI) AND THE PUBLIC REGARDING POWER REACTOR DECOMMISSIONING RULEMAKING ISSUES On November 27, 2000, the NRC staff met with representatives of NEI and members of the public to receive feedback about ongoing NRC efforts to determine the risk posed by permanently shutdown nuclear power plants and the status of NRC efforts to amend its regulations to properly reflect the risk posed by these facilities. The meeting agenda is provided in Enclosure 1. An additional agenda topic associated with a generic issue related to a Maine Yankee security exemption request was requested by NEI at the beginning of the meeting. A list of attendees is provided in Enclosure 2.
NRC began the meeting by stating that the spent fuel pool risk study being prepared by the NRC Technical Working Group had not been finalized and was currently with the Office of the Executive Director for Operations for concurrence prior to being submitted to the Commission.
NRC began the meeting by stating that the spent fuel pool risk study being prepared by the NRC Technical Working Group had not been finalized and was currently with the Office of the Executive Director for Operations for concurrence prior to being submitted to the Commission.
The draft version of the risk study was issued February 2000 (ADAMS Accession No.
The draft version of the risk study was issued February 2000 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003683371).
ML003683371).
NEI then discussed industry concerns associated with the spent fuel pool risk study and the application of the risk study conclusions to the integrated decommissioning rulemaking. NEI first discussed the seismic risk assessment methodology used in the risk study. NEI stated that it had a concern that by using both the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Electric Power Research Institute seismic hazard curves in assessing the seismic risk, the NRC staff would base decisions on the most conservative curve and thus in effect would not determine the best estimate risk. The NRC agreed that the purpose of the risk study was to determine the best estimate risk; however, the NRC disagreed that either curve was considered more valid. NRC stated that both curves were equally valid, and therefore, both were presented in the risk study. NEI stated that it would have to review the risk study once finalized, and then may suggest that the NRC determine a methodology to combine the two seismic hazard curves to develop one curve.
NEI then discussed industry concerns associated with the spent fuel pool risk study and the application of the risk study conclusions to the integrated decommissioning rulemaking. NEI first discussed the seismic risk assessment methodology used in the risk study. NEI stated that it had a concern that by using both the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Electric Power Research Institute seismic hazard curves in assessing the seismic risk, the NRC staff would base decisions on the most conservative curve and thus in effect would not determine the best estimate risk. The NRC agreed that the purpose of the risk study was to determine the best estimate risk; however, the NRC disagreed that either curve was considered more valid. NRC stated that both curves were equally valid, and therefore, both were presented in the risk study. NEI stated that it would have to review the risk study once finalized, and then may suggest that the NRC determine a methodology to combine the two seismic hazard curves to develop one curve.
Next, NEI stated that the ruthenium release during an uncontrollable heatup of the fuel after a loss of water in the spent fuel pool was overestimated in the risk study. NEI believed that the fuel in the spent fuel pool would, under accident conditions, act similar to a slumped core and thus limit the amount of oxygen available, resulting in a ruthenium source term similar to that described in NUREG-1465, Accident Source Terms for Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants.
Next, NEI stated that the ruthenium release during an uncontrollable heatup of the fuel after a loss of water in the spent fuel pool was overestimated in the risk study. NEI believed that the fuel in the spent fuel pool would, under accident conditions, act similar to a slumped core and thus limit the amount of oxygen available, resulting in a ruthenium source term similar to that described in NUREG-1465, Accident Source Terms for Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants.

Latest revision as of 10:53, 28 March 2020

Meeting Summary with Nuclear Energy Instituteand the Public Regarding Power Reactor Decommissiong Rulemaking Issues
ML003781998
Person / Time
Issue date: 12/28/2000
From: David Wrona
NRC/NRR/DLPM
To:
Nuclear Energy Institute
Wrona D, NRR/DLPM, 415-1924
Shared Package
ML003773038 List:
References
-nr, Project 689
Download: ML003781998 (6)


Text

December 28, 2000 ORGANIZATION: Nuclear Energy Institute

SUBJECT:

SUMMARY

OF PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE (NEI) AND THE PUBLIC REGARDING POWER REACTOR DECOMMISSIONING RULEMAKING ISSUES On November 27, 2000, the NRC staff met with representatives of NEI and members of the public to receive feedback about ongoing NRC efforts to determine the risk posed by permanently shutdown nuclear power plants and the status of NRC efforts to amend its regulations to properly reflect the risk posed by these facilities. The meeting agenda is provided in Enclosure 1. An additional agenda topic associated with a generic issue related to a Maine Yankee security exemption request was requested by NEI at the beginning of the meeting. A list of attendees is provided in Enclosure 2.

NRC began the meeting by stating that the spent fuel pool risk study being prepared by the NRC Technical Working Group had not been finalized and was currently with the Office of the Executive Director for Operations for concurrence prior to being submitted to the Commission.

The draft version of the risk study was issued February 2000 (ADAMS Accession No. ML003683371).

NEI then discussed industry concerns associated with the spent fuel pool risk study and the application of the risk study conclusions to the integrated decommissioning rulemaking. NEI first discussed the seismic risk assessment methodology used in the risk study. NEI stated that it had a concern that by using both the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Electric Power Research Institute seismic hazard curves in assessing the seismic risk, the NRC staff would base decisions on the most conservative curve and thus in effect would not determine the best estimate risk. The NRC agreed that the purpose of the risk study was to determine the best estimate risk; however, the NRC disagreed that either curve was considered more valid. NRC stated that both curves were equally valid, and therefore, both were presented in the risk study. NEI stated that it would have to review the risk study once finalized, and then may suggest that the NRC determine a methodology to combine the two seismic hazard curves to develop one curve.

Next, NEI stated that the ruthenium release during an uncontrollable heatup of the fuel after a loss of water in the spent fuel pool was overestimated in the risk study. NEI believed that the fuel in the spent fuel pool would, under accident conditions, act similar to a slumped core and thus limit the amount of oxygen available, resulting in a ruthenium source term similar to that described in NUREG-1465, Accident Source Terms for Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants.

NEI stated that it would provide a letter to the NRC documenting the topic addressed above.

The NRC staff stated that it would review the letter as appropriate; however, two ruthenium source terms were considered in the risk study, the NUREG-1465 source term and a higher source term.

NEI then discussed the use of adiabatic heatup in risk study calculations. NEI contended that the use of an adiabatic heatup results in a bounding, conservative analysis and not a best estimate risk assessment. The NRC staff noted that the adiabatic heatup was used since a better, defensible analysis was not available. The NRC staff also noted that the heatup

analysis was used only for determination of the timing of the event. NEI requested that the staff ensure the risk study is clear in that the adiabatic heatup was used only for determination of the timing of the event.

Next, NEI discussed a recent issue associated with the process for obtaining NRC approval for substitution of the 10 CFR 73.51 independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) specific license security requirements for the 10 CFR 73.55 general license security requirements at the Maine Yankee ISFSI (NEI handout in ADAMS under Accession No. ML003772839). The NRC staff stated that a review and approval process for this requested transition is currently being developed and the industry would be informed once the process is finalized.

NEI and members of the public were given an opportunity to ask questions and then the meeting was concluded.

/RA/

David J. Wrona, Project Manager Decommissioning Section Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Project No. 689

Enclosures:

1. Agenda
2. Attendees cc w/encls: See next page

analysis was used only for determination of the timing of the event. NEI requested that the staff ensure the risk study is clear in that the adiabatic heatup was used only for determination of the timing of the event.

Next, NEI discussed a recent issue associated with the process for obtaining NRC approval for substitution of the 10 CFR 73.51 independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) specific license security requirements for the 10 CFR 73.55 general license security requirements at the Maine Yankee ISFSI (NEI handout in ADAMS under Accession No. ML003772839). The NRC staff stated that a review and approval process for this requested transition is currently being developed and the industry would be informed once the process is finalized.

NEI and members of the public were given an opportunity to ask questions and then the meeting was concluded.

/RA/

David J. Wrona, Project Manager Decommissioning Section Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Project No. 689

Enclosures:

1. Agenda
2. Attendees cc w/encls: See next page DISTRIBUTION:

PUBLIC RidsNrrPMPHarris AMarkley PDIV-D r/f CACarpenter (RidsDripRgeb) MCase RidsOgcMailCenter JHannon (RidsDssaSplb) GKelly RidsAcrsAcnwMailCenter BJorgensen (RidsRgn3MailCenter) RSavio SCollins (RidsNrrOd) DBSpitzberg (RidsRgn4MailCenter) RSkelton BSheron (RidsNrrAdpt) RidsNrrPMMRipley DBarss JZwolinski/SBlack (RidsNrrDlpm) RidsNrrPMDWrona CFeldman GHolahan (RidsNrrDssa) RidsNrrPMJHickman NDudley SRichards (RidsNrrDlpmLpdiv) RidsNrrPMJBirmingham TCollins MMasnik (RidsNrrDlpmLpdiv3) RidsNrrPMDScaletti FKantor RidsNrrPMRDudley RidsNmssPMSBrown GBagchi RidsNrrPMWHuffman CPoslusny FEltawila RidsNrrPMJMinns RBellamy (RidsRgn1MailCenter) JBeall RidsNrrPMLWheeler LCamper MSatorius RidsNrrPMPRay GHubbard LPittiglio RidsNrrPMMWebb RidsNmssPMRNelson JShea RidsNrrLACJamerson MMalloy SLewis GTracy (RidsNrrIolb) TMcMurtray TKing TBergman ACCESSION NO.: ML003781998 OFFICE PDIV-D/PM PDIV-D/LA PDIV-D/SC NAME DWrona CJamerson RDudley for MMasnik DATE 12/13/00 12/13/00 12/19/00 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

NEI/Public Meeting on Decommissioning Rulemaking November 27, 2000

Purpose:

To receive feedback from interested industry representatives and members of the public about ongoing NRC efforts to determine the risk posed by permanently shutdown nuclear power plants and the status of NRC efforts to amend its regulations to properly reflect the risk posed by these facilities.

Outcome:

  • Industry and public stakeholders will provide their comments on the above topics to the NRC Process:
1. Introductions and review of purpose/agenda 5 min
2. NEI discussion of industry concerns
a. Seismic risk assessment methodology used in TWG report (NEI) 20 min

- NRC/public stakeholder comments/questions 5 min

b. Impact of seismic risk on integrated decommissioning rulemaking (NEI) 20min

- NRC/public stakeholder comments/questions 5 min

c. Methodology for assessing spent fuel pool risk over time 20 min

- NRC/public stakeholder comments/questions 5 min

3. Summary of commitments / Adjourn 10 min Enclosure 1

DECOMMISSIONING RULEMAKING MEETING November 27, 2000 NRC Headquarters Rockville, MD ATTENDEES NAME ORGANIZATION Brian Sheron NRC/NRR John Zwolinski NRC/NRR/DLPM Gary M. Holahan NRC/NRR/DSSA Stuart Richards NRC/NRR/DLPM Richard Dudley NRC/NRR/DLPM William Huffman NRC/NRR/DLPM Mike Ripley NRC/NRR/DLPM David Wrona NRC/NRR/DLPM Goutam Bagchi NRC/NRR/DE Anthony Markley NRC/NRR/DRIP Dan Barss NRC/NRR/DIPM Glenn Tracy NRC/NRR/IOLB Bob Skelton NRC/NRR/IOLB Noel Dudley NRC/ACRS Joe Shea NRC/OEDO Tom King NRC/RES Farouk Eltawila NRC/RES/DSARE Larry Camper NRC/NMSS/DCB Stewart Brown NRC/NMSS/DWM/DCB Sue Perez FEMA/REP Mike Callahan GSI Carey W. Flemming Winston & Strawn Altheia Wyche SERCH Licensing/Bechtel Jenny Weil McGraw-Hill Lynette Hendricks NEI Alan Nelson NEI Mike Meisner MYAPC Enclosure 2

Nuclear Energy Institute Project No. 689/+decom cc:

Mr. Ralph Beedle Mr. Michael Meisner Senior Vice President Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co.

and Chief Nuclear Officer 321 Old Ferry Road Nuclear Energy Institute Wiscassett, ME 04578-4922 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708 Mr. Paul Blanch Energy Consultant Mr. Alex Marion, Director 135 Hyde Road Programs West Hartford, CT 06117 Nuclear Energy Institute 1776 I Street, Suite 400 New England Coalition on Nuclear Washington, DC 20006-3708 Pollution P. O. Box 545 Mr. David Modeen, Director Brattleboro, VT 05302 Engineering Nuclear Energy Institute Mr. Ray Shadis 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Friends of the Coast Washington, DC 20006-3708 P. O. Box 98 Edgecomb, ME 04556 Mr. Anthony Pietrangelo, Director Licensing Mr. David Lochbaum Nuclear Energy Institute Nuclear Safety Engineer 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Union of Concerned Scientists Washington, DC 20006-3708 1707 H Street, NW, Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20006 Mr. Jim Davis, Director Operations Mr. Paul Gunter Nuclear Energy Institute Nuclear Information Resource Service 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 1424 16th St. NW, Suite 404 Washington, DC 20006-3708 Washington, DC 20036 Ms. Lynnette Hendricks, Director Mr. Peter James Atherton Plant Support P.O. Box 2337 Nuclear Energy Institute Washington, DC 20013 1776 I Street, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20006-3708 Mr. H. G. Brack Center for Biological Monitoring Mr. H. A. Sepp, Manager P.O. Box 144 Regulatory and Licensing Engineering Hulls Cove, ME 04644 Westinghouse Electric Company P.O. Box 355 Ms. Deborah B. Katz Pittsburgh, PA 15230-0355 Citizens Awareness Network P. O. Box 3023 Mr. Charles B. Brinkman, Director Charlemont, MA 01339-3023 Washington Operations ABB-Combustion Engineering, Inc. Mr. Robert Holden 12300 Twinbrook Parkway, Suite 330 National Congress of American Indians Rockville, MD 20852 Suite 200 1301 Connecticut Ave, NW Washington DC, 20036 September 2000