Latest revision as of 19:30, 18 January 2022

Text

NRC-2020-000129 - Resp 4- Interim, Agency Records Subject to Request Enclosed, Part 2 of 2
	ML21202A190
Person / Time
Issue date:	07/21/2021
From:	; NRC/OCIO
To:	;
Shared Package
ML21202A186	List: ML21202A187; ML21202A188; ML21202A189; ML21202A190;
References
	NRC-2020-000129
	Download: ML21202A190 (25)
	v • d • e

Summary of the January 25, 2018 List of Items Coming to the Commission for Review 12018 I (Including Staff Generated Items - Listed in Months by Due Date)

~-

I I Mar Jun Rule ACIPRM 50-1071S18--0003 d

....,,_,a.i_11J_ __,l,V E] ""

Co -EOF P,trtlll Flnll Aia-MC&A

,._. 1* 1M1r111 R-.ic:hengeo

~

~tpetllon Pf'OG (7/2/18) eJ Qi,liclnl S.C..,tyA,,qi Su,i-MC&A..__

P~NRC Ulg (S111-000e <i1 ~ Req1 (3112118]

1n 1118) (2/11181 UnllecllE-'of o,,i.,,. CORRMofllllr UpdallPI,,_ CORR-Monlr4y LLW~ ,d lmpleff*- R!'lc.aog,..d Ope,-.~ Rp(Congiua HV,1'(7/11,'18) s11-oooe 1,V SEA0-3 (2,11111( ~ (51411111 lhll(6-'21111111 (11181181 (xpot!CI F..,_on~Pan CORR Manl'ly Pl apply III New ~~

Oepietea u,..,,, 37 IYlfl/1111 Rpceo,,g,.. R~6/2W18) &RegOutltt KorM 11118118) HW'l...,181 (7/28118)

PRM 90-0109 FNIR.. RG&III CORRMonllly

,.,,,.llloca -t,l,lgaon Rl'IC<lnor-RMCIIOn I11>>1&) FarC~l- ~(e/0,'18)

[3IJ(li18)

PRM S0.110 t.-..o~

RIMI-Warmed *~01.wa SSC* (2127118] (8121/IIJ tAJ~

~ FY 17 (21281181 tnlo.,W,, Ra Pl'ogrwnUS--

(11>>1111

~

201711131MII CORR-Monthly RplCongma N\WICORR- I 8-IC

)(,1N111 LbM!gAalvlla6

~Duwe (2/21MIJ

.~.~*1.t.

~

I!

Ii,

--vc.,.o*

.I

.r

...(\

~

List of Papers C. g to the Commission, by Due Date (Including Staff Generated Papers)

Croa Reference Due Data Title of Paper (Tasking) Office Review Month NOtlts Number S~ff Generated - Julv 2016 07/22J2016 Update on the Foreign Assignee Program OIP J liy Items Tracked - Januarv 2017 01/27/2017 Provide policy paper for a CommlSSIOn decision on Mure NRR Februa,y 201000174 efforts related to lhe LOOPILOCA rule (General Design SRM-S02-0057-4 Cnterion (GDC) 35{SRM-S02--0057)

Staff Generated - January 2017 01/23/2017 Ol$p0$lbon rA PRM-50-109 on Alkali-silica reaction NRR February 01/25/2017 Export License

HEU Reload al SCK-CEN Belgrum OIP Februaiy Expedited Review 01/27/2017 COMSECY on Propoteel Changes to ExeculMI ADM February Transportation SeMCes 01/27/2017 COMSECY on Proposed Random Saeemng Program ADM Februaty 01/30/2017 Status Update on Response to Lessons Learned from NRR January Japan's March 11 , 2011 , Great Tohoku Earthquake ard Subsequent Tsunarm Printed on 01l 18/'l018 Page 1 of 29

From: RulemakingComments Resource To: "Debbie Grinnell" Cc: Vietti-Cook Annette: Julian Emile

Subject:

RE: C- 10 Foundation"s 2.802 Petition for Rulemaking to the NRG Date: Friday, September 26, 2014 8 :10:00 AM Ms. Grinnell:

On behalf of the Office of the Secretary, I am confirming receipt of C-1O's petition for rulemaking.

Thank you.

Herald Speiser Herald M. Speiser Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff Office of the Secretary Nuclear Regulatory Commission

{301) 415-1675 From: Debbie Grinnell [1]

Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2014 9:54 AM To: RulemakingComments Resource

Subject:

C-1 0 Foundation's 2.802 Petition for Rulemaking to the NRG Hello Ms. Vietti-Cook:

Please find t he C-10 letter and our 2.802 Petition for Ru lemaking attached for submission to your office. Wou ld you please be so kind as to confirm that you received t hem.

Sincerely, Debbie Debb ie Grinne ll Research Manager C-10 Foundation 44 Merrimac Street Newbu ryport, M a. 01950 Debbie@C-10,org Tel. 978-465-6646

From : RulemakjngComments Resource To : RidsEdoMailCenter Resource Cc : Bladey Cindy: Giitter Rebecca : Julian Emile: Newell Brian : RulemakingComments Resource: Sola Clara : Yi.e1l.i.::.

Cook Annette Subject : EDO ACTION ITEM: FW: C-1 0 Foundation"s 2.802 Petition for Rulemaking to the NRC Date: Friday, September 26, 2014 8:22 :19 AM Attachments : C-10 Foundatioo**s 2 so2 Petition for Rulemakjna to the NBC mso Attached is a petition for rulemaking submitted by Sandra Gavutis on behalf of the C-10 Fou ndation regarding revision to applicable regu lations to :

1) Require that all licensees comply with ACI 349.3R

2) Require that all licensees comply with ASTM C 856-11 , Standard Practice for Petrographic Examination of Hardened Concrete.

ACTION OFFICE : EOO ACTION : APPROPRIATE SECY did confirm receipt of the petition , as requested in the email.

Thank you .

Herald Herald M. Speiser Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff Office of the Secretary Nuclear Regulatory Commission

{301} 415-1675

From: Debbie Grinnell Sent: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 09 :53 :38 -0400 To: RulemakingComments Resou rce

Subject:

C-10 Foundation's 2.802 Petition for Rulemaking to the NRC Attachments: Scan0009.pdf, Seabrook ASR Petition for Rulemaking-2.docx Hel lo Ms. Vietti-Cook:

Please find the C-10 letter and our 2.802 Petition for Rulemaking attached for submission to your office.

Would you please be so kind as to confirm that you rece ived them .

Sincerely, Debbie Debbie Grinnell Research Manager C-10 Foundation 44 Merrimac Street Newburyport, Ma . 01950 Debbie@C-lO.org Tel. 978-465-6646

I Septembe r 25, 2014

.* A\' ,-

- C-10 .

- ~

Annette L. Vietti-Cook Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudicatio ns Staff

Dear Ms. Vietti-Cook:

On behalf of the C-10 Research and Education Foundation (C-10), I submit the enclosed petition for rulemaking pursuant to 10 CFR 2.802 to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to request the NRC, following notice and opportunit y for comment, to amend its regulations to provide better protection against concrete degradation at U.S. nuclea r power plants.

In 2009, Seabrook Station became the first plant to discover ASR concrete degradation in the U.S. nuclear fleet. At an NRC public meeting at Seabrook Station on June 24, 2014, C-10 asked if the NRC was investigatin g the U.S. nuclear fleet for Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) concrete degradation. NRC staff responded that ASR concrete degradatio n could be adequately indicated through visual examinatio n.

C-10 believes that the NRC current reliance on a visual inspection will not adequately identify ASR, does not confirm ASR, or provide the current state of ASR damage {if present) without petrograph ic analysis under current existing code.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.802, C-10 petitions the following requests to the NRC to revise applicable regulations to:

1) Require that all licensees comply with ACI 349.3R

2) Require that all licensees comply with ASTM C 856-11, Standard Practice for Petrographic Examination of Hardened Concrete.

Sincerely,

.xl ~A ~d ~

Sandra Gavutis Executive Director C-10 Foundatio n 44 Merrimac Street Newburyp ort, Ma. 01950 sandra@C-10.o_r.g

'I.: f.lll' CA / 1 c,\' o,,,

t,.-v't'

/:'

o("..

..,. */ ,

C,:

0 .-\

0 u <

,.f'

)".,./ .\,~

,f(, . ~.,.

,\ I',\ IN ,\ \II\.

PETITION FOR RULEMAKING This petition for rulemaking is submitted pursuant to IO CFR 2.802 by the C-10 Research and Education Foundation w ith assistance from the Union of Concerned Scientists. The petitioner requests that the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), fo llowing notice and opportunity for comment, amend its regulations to provide better protection against concrete degradation at U.S. nuclear power plants.

1. STATEMENT OF PETITIONER'S INTEREST The C-10 Research and Education Foundation (C-10) was established in 1991 to address the health and safety issues related to the Seabrook Station nuclear power plant C-10 is a non-profit 501 ( c)(3) organization that evolved from C itizens Within the Ten-Mile Radius, a 5,000 member organizati.on founded in 1986 to challenge evacuation plans for the Seabrook Station reactor. The organization's website (http://c-l O.org/) contains additional information.

C-10 has been engaging the NRC about concrete degradation at Seabrook since December 22, 2011 . C-10 has been actively monitoring this issue since that time. The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) has worked with C- 10 on this issue since 2012 and assisted C-10 in preparing this petition.

11. BACKGROUND On June 1, 20 I 0, NextEra Energy Seabrook Station submitted an application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a license renewal to the year 2050, 20 years in advance of their current license expiration of 2030. On December 22, 20 11, C- 10 requested information from the N RC regarding Seabrook's concrete degradation in several safety related buildings and structures. On September 13, 2012, C- 10 and UCS requested that the NRC require NextEra to conduct complete systematic testing and assessment of Seabrook Station's containment to determine the current status of degradation of the concrete and corrosion of steel due to alkali-silica reaction (ASR) concrete degradation.

At an NRC publ ic meeting at Seabrook Station on June 24, 2014, C-10 asked if the NRC was investigating the US nuclear fleet for ASR concrete degradation. The NRC staff responded that ASR concrete degradation could be adequately indicated through visual examination.

C-10 believes that the reliance on a visual inspection will not adequately identify ASR, does not confirm ASR, or provide the current state of ASR damage (if present) w ithout petrographic analysis under current existing code.

III. PROPOSED ACTIONS C-10 petitions the requests to the NRC to revise applicable regulations to:

I. Require that all licensees comply w ith ACT 349.3R

2. Require that a ll licensees comply with ASTM C 856-11, Standard Practice for P,etrographic Examination of Hardened Concrete

Petition for Rulemaking: Better Protection Against Concrete Degradation at Nuclear Power Plants IV. RA TlONALE FOR THE CHANGES For years, Seabrook's existing structure monitoring program failed to define, further investigate or mitigate the root cause when evidence of concrete degradation was present. NextEra stated on page 30 of the enclosure to its response dated December 17, 201 0, to the NRC (ADAMS MLI03540534)) that "visual examination of concrete containment surface (VT-3C) inspection results from October 2005 identified numerous areas of spalled concrete that was equal or exceed a depth of I inch." In 2005, NextEra had not adopted ACT 349.34R-02 although it had been " recommended" by the NRC. Furthermore, ACT 349.3R-02 Sec. 5 states, "spalled concrete that exceed a depth of3/8 inch and 4 inch in any direction must be evaluated.

On page 31, the NRC reports, " Five action requests (AR) were issued during ASME Section XI, IWL examinations of containment concrete, eighty-four (84) deficient areas were identified that required an engineering evaluation." NextEra never had a code certified "responsible engineer" doing the visual inspections and the NRC was unaware that Seabrook was not following the recommended code inspection requirements.

It is understood and required when structural degradation is occurring it is critical to determine the root cause, and confirm the fo rm of degradation. The NRC has repeatedly stated that ASR is confirmed only through petrographic examinations in accordance with ASTM code. ln the second paragraph under Section 3.0 D iagnosis, of the enclosure to its submittal to the NRC dated May 1, 2013, (ADAMS ML13151A328),

NextEra stated:

The.first core samples were removed in April and May o.f2010. Twelve core samples were taken from the lower electrical tunnel in the Control building. This area was selected because, qualitatively, it had the most significant groundwater intrusion, and the walls show the most extensive pattern cracking and seconda,y deposits. The initial visual examination of the core samples was positive - the core samples displayed the visual characteristics of high quality, competent concrete and proper concrete placement procedures. However, subsequent quantitative testing revealed a reduction in concrete strength and elasticity modulus (Young's modulus). Petrographic examinations in accordance with ASTM C856 identified the presence of ASR.

Since April 2012, C-10 and UCS have been providing Dr. Paul Brown's commentaries to the NRC to provide expert clarification of the science in this specialized field of material science. On December 2, 2012, Dr. Brown offered the scientific basis for challenging the central hypothesis in NextEra's report titled "Impact of ASR on Concrete Structures and Attachments" (ADAMS ML12151A396) "that confinement reduces cracking, and taking a core bore to test would no longer represent the context of the structure once removed from the structure as inval id." The NRC did not challenge NextEra's hypothesis to our knowledge, despite existing documentation from NRC research and expert submitted commentaries to its contrary.

NRC position paper "ln situ Monitoring of ASR-affected Concrete" prepared by Angela Buford states on page 3, "ASR can exist in concrete without indications of pattern cracking. In addition, in ASR-affected structures with reinforcement close to the surface or in heavily reinforced structures, surface cracking may be suppressed while internal damage exists throughout the section." This paper states on page 4, "For concrete in the field, the surface indications sometimes poorly correlate to the extent of ASR degradation within the concrete". Furthermore, on page 5 it states, "For some structures exposed to ASR, internal damage occurs through the depth of the section but visible cracking is suppressed by heavy reinforcement.

Crack mapping alone to determine ASR effects on the structure does not allow for the consideration of re bar stresses."

September 25, 2014 Page 2

Petition for Rulemaking: Better Protection Against Concrete Degradation at Nuclear Power Plants The record is abundantly clear that visual inspections alone (a) cannot reliably identify ASR-affected concrete, and (b) cannot consider associated degradation mechanisms such as rebar stresses. Yet when NextEra determined 131 locations with "assumed" ASR visual signs w ithin multiple power-block structures during 20 12, further engineering evaluations were not done. Si nce the NRC discovered this situation, the NRC has not required Seabrook to test criteria requiring an engineering evaluation with a single core bore taken from containment to confirm ASR suspicions or required any certified lab testing of key material prope1ties to determine the extent of condition or obtain the data necessary to monitor the rate of progression.

Codes and standards exist that are capable of detecting ASR and determining the key material properties needed to evaluate the degree and severity of ASR damage. For example, American Concrete Institute (AC1) Standard 349.3R02 has been endorsed by the NRC (ADAMS ML! 1224 1029) as an acceptable method of protecting against excessive ASR concrete degradation. But by merely endorsing an acceptable method, the NRC has al lowed its licensees to instead implement alternatives yielding unacceptable results.

For example, ACI 349.3R-02 states that the composite team1 formed to evaluate concrete degradation indications include civil/stmctural engineers, concrete inspectors and technicians capable of knowing concrete degradation mechanisms and long-tenn performance issues. NextEra did not have composite team.

In fact, since they became the owners of Seabrook, before the ASR discovery in 2009, they did not even have a trained and dedicated "responsible engineer" conducting the inspections. NextEra had untrained employees conducting the visual examinations of buildings and no one trained engineer conducting the inspections to accurately record the results or trained to take further action as required. NextEra fai led to test the concrete despite the extent of cracking visibly increasing for years.

ff the NRC had required instead of merely encouraged compliance with existing codes and standards, C-10 believes Seabrook's ASR concrete degradation would have been identified before it caused moderate to severe degradation in all Seabrook seismic category 1 structures.

The inability of visual inspections to identify concrete degradation is not confined to the ASR experience at Seabrook. Workers identified significant cracking in the concrete wall of the shie ld bui lding at the Daivs-Besse nuclear plant o n October I 0, 2011. This degradation was found when a hole was cut through the building's wall to allow the degraded reactor vessel head to be replaced. According to the plant's owner, "Previous visual inspections of the shield building exterior surface performed over many years did not identify any unusual surface defects or symptoms of distress that would have indicated the presence of the subsurface concrete laminar cracking" (ADAMS ML120600056). The owners attributed the cracking to moisture blown into the concrete wall's pores during a severe winter storm in 1978. Thus, the concrete degradation remained undetected by visual inspections for up to 33 years.

Even if visual inspections for concrete degradation were adequately reliable-which ample "concrete" evidence demonstrates to be the case-they would still be insufficient due to their limited scope. Visual inspections can only examine exterior surfaces. Many portions of concrete buildings simply cannot be visually inspected. The below grade portions, those regions most likely to be exposed to groundwater and thus most likely vulnerable to ASR, cannot be examined. 1t is imperative that more reliable means of monitoring the condition of concrete be performed to detect degradation before it becomes so pervasive that even the unreliable, limited-scope visual inspections notice it.

September 25, 2014 Page 3

Petition for Rulemaking: Better Protection Against Concrete Degradation at Nuclear Power Plants V. CONCLUSION C- 10 petitions the NRC to require its licensees comply with industry codes and standards already endorsed by the agency. Visual inspections have been repeatedly proven unable to reliably monitor concrete conditions and prevent significant degradation. The NRC-endorsed codes and standards provide better protection against safety margin erosion caused by concrete degradation.

Thus, the proposed actions requested by the petitioners could be implemented by the NRC as expeditiously as possible.

September 25, 2014 Page 4

From : Debbie Griooell To : Rulemakinacomments Resource Subject : C-10 Foundation"s 2.802 Petition for Ru lemaking to the NRG Date: Thursday, September 25 , 2014 9 :53 :48 AM Attachments: Scan000.!t odf S_e_abrook ASR Petition for Rulernakioa-2.do_cl(

Hello Ms. Vietti-Cook :

Please find t he C-10 letter and our 2.802 Petition fo r Rulemakin g attached for submiss ion to you r office. Wo uld yo u please be so kind as to co nfirm t hat yo u received them.

Sincerely, Debbie Debbie Grinne ll Research M anager C-10 Foundation 44 Merrimac Street Newburyp ort, Ma. 01950 Debbie@C-lO.org Tel. 978-465-6646

I Septembe r 25, 2014

.* A\' ,-

- C-10 .

- ~

Annette L. Vietti-Cook Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudicatio ns Staff

Dear Ms. Vietti-Cook:

On behalf of the C-10 Research and Education Foundation (C-10), I submit the enclosed petition for rulemaking pursuant to 10 CFR 2.802 to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to request the NRC, following notice and opportunit y for comment, to amend its regulations to provide better protection against concrete degradation at U.S. nuclea r power plants.

In 2009, Seabrook Station became the first plant to discover ASR concrete degradation in the U.S. nuclear fleet. At an NRC public meeting at Seabrook Station on June 24, 2014, C-10 asked if the NRC was investigatin g the U.S. nuclear fleet for Alkali-Silica Reaction (ASR) concrete degradation. NRC staff responded that ASR concrete degradatio n could be adequately indicated through visual examinatio n.

C-10 believes that the NRC current reliance on a visual inspection will not adequately identify ASR, does not confirm ASR, or provide the current state of ASR damage {if present) without petrograph ic analysis under current existing code.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.802, C-10 petitions the following requests to the NRC to revise applicable regulations to:

1) Require that all licensees comply with ACI 349.3R

2) Require that all licensees comply with ASTM C 856-11, Standard Practice for Petrographic Examination of Hardened Concrete.

Sincerely,

.xl ~A ~d ~

Sandra Gavutis Executive Director C-10 Foundatio n 44 Merrimac Street Newburyp ort, Ma. 01950 sandra@C-10.o_r.g

'I.: f.lll' CA / 1 c,\' o,,,

t,.-v't'

/:'

o("..

..,. */ ,

C,:

0 .-\

0 u <

,.f'

)".,./ .\,~